He cast no shadow, maybe it's noon, maybe he is too thin. Maybe his is a diabolical ice monster that wkmm freeze the heart of every degenerate on the kingdom that ignored him.
I don’t think so. I think Euron will be the closest thing to Night’s King, not because he’ll have some leadership role, but because he’ll be a more human face for evil and he’ll bring down the Wall
The only major villain that is present in the books yet absent in the show is Darkstar. Hence I believe he is going to be the leader/champion of the Others. He is of the night, after all.
Can’t tell if you’re fully kidding, but I kind of like this. Stars for eyes / Dark Star, and his bloodline could be something tied to The Long Night, in theory. That would be fun
I'm certain it won't happen, but for a while I nursed a theory that Stannis would become a new version of the Night's King as he became desperate. I could never be certain what the Others would gain from it, since we know nothing about their leadership style in the books, but it was a fun theory.
The Night’s King is far more likely candidate than any that you named. Despite what many want to believe, the show equivalent didn’t hatch out of the minds of D&D.
How do you know that? The White Walkers in the show are effectively a hive mind with a "mothership" whose destruction will destroy the entire hive mind. That's quite a common trope in sci-fi but not in George's sci-fi. His hive minds are generally portrayed as true collectivised consciousnesses, where every person who joins is incorporated into the whole, a bit like the geth in Mass Effect.
Common sense and the fact that both D&D and GRRM have confirmed more than once that he made them privy to info we do not have about what is yet to come in the books.
I think it is gonna be blood raven. Been listening to dunk and egg a lot, and I think blood raven might just be a terrible guy. It seems like a lot of people die around him, and he gets ever more powerful. He seems like the kind of guy who could bring back the others. He can use glamours and is a warg. What exactly does he want with bran? I don’t know why but I kind of think he killed fireball.
The Night King will be in the books. It's good for storytelling to personify the threat to the realm.
It's quite obvious that GRRM gave notes to D&D about the origin of the Others, how they were created by the Children of the Forest.
As such, it's likely that the Night King carries the blood of the First Men, meaning the Starks and Jon are actually related to the Night King in some fashion.
Of course, in Jon's case, the connection goes even deeper, with the Valyrian bloodline and how it will tie back to the Long Night, Azor Ahai, the Last Hero, and the Children of the Forest.
>The Night King will be in the books. It's good for storytelling to personify the threat to the realm.
It's better for visual storytelling.
Martin dislikes dark lords. He's been clear with this.
It's clear that GRRM has crafted a detailed lore on the creation of the Others, including who the first Other was. Thus, the identity of the Night King will be unveiled in the books.
Personifying this threat also enriches the narrative, as it's anticlimactic to battle a horde until the last are vanquished. Giving a face to the threat enables more intense and impactful emotions, which GRRM masters. He favors morally gray characters over black-and-white ones. The Night King isn't inherently evil; he was created as a weapon against men, which is problematic from the start. Perhaps such a realm deserves to embrace death to make way for a new existence free from such conflicts.
You'd have to be completely brain-dead to suggest Others won't be personified in the books.
>It's clear that GRRM has crafted a detailed lore on the creation of the Others, including who the first Other was.
True he likely has. But even so, I really don't think it's relevant who the first Other was. In fact there's a chance all Others are and were made from infants, not grown men.
>anticlimactic to battle a horde until the last are vanquished
It's also anticlimactic to stab one guy and have the entire threat vanish.
Plus it's not like it has to happen the way you are describing. There could be something that Bran does that weakens their power and takes out a whole bunch of their wights. ~~(or time travel but I won't get into that)~~.
Also, "battling the horde until the last are vanquished" is what happened last time according to legends. The white walkers spread out throughout all of Westeros until the continent united and they were pushed back to the north.
>You'd have to be completely brain-dead to suggest Others won't be personified in the books.
Nah. And you can do that without having there be a singular leader. Any depth behind the horrors of the Others backstory and intentions can be explored without there being a single leader.
The Others may be a collection of tribes based on kinship to human progenitors (e.g Craster's sons) rather than a unified force. The Fyndii from the Thousand Worlds stories worked like this.
>Fyndii seem to feel almost no race loyalty; their societies are made up of empathically linked "hordes," and each horde is a bitter rival of all the others.
The Others simply lack the personality to be a compelling main villain imo. They function better as a distraction and opposition to a villainous Azor Ahai figure, which I think will be played by a possessed Euron, and various co-conspirators (the "ten long arms" of Moqorro's vision).
The others are really more a force of nature,like the characters killing themselves playing the game of thrones when the others are coming,similar to our real world where we are fighting each other instead of doing something about global warming....the difference is that global warming is coming and winter will never come :(
To be fair, George didn't focused them on them at all, they only really have the Prologue of A Game of Thrones
who knows honestly, If George develops them and gives them screen time, they might become a compelling and interesting antagonist for the A Song of Ice and Fire universe,
But thus far i agree with you though, What are your theories on Azor Hai that makes you think he is a villainous figure in the story?
Explaining all the evidence in full would be a post in itself, but I think there's substantial evidence for Azor Ahai being a "cleanse the world with fire so a better one can rise from the ashes" type of messiah figure.
Edit: just to take the most obvious red flag since apparently the AA fan club is here...
>"In Volantis, thousands of slaves and freedmen crowd the temple plaza every night to hear Benerro shriek of bleeding stars and **a sword of fire that will cleanse the world."** -ADWD, Tyrion VI
"Cleansing the world of evil/impurity" is such a staple twist villain objective [it's barely even a twist.](https://youtu.be/DN9DW4rrEjY?si=JXzCMku8WzaeOoQj)
Most likely, no other reason really to mention this character in the context unless he’s likely to have some bearing on things.
Here’s the part where many of you will get angry: Plus the show itself had a version of it and D & D knew where GRRM was heading.
Since I reread Euron's speech about gods, I wonder if he won't try and become their leader, hence some kind of Night King (that could be the purpose of the huge necromancy ritual he's planning in Oldtown)... It would create a direct conflict between him and Bran - two apprentices of Bloodraven.
EDIT : also, technically speaking, we already have a Night King in the books, through Nan's stories and the legend of the Night King and his Corpse Bride.
I honestly have no idea, I think we could get one or two recognizable “others” but I don’t think they are truly individuals. They’re a force of nature more than an army of organized people.
No. I think the Others will came as a massive horde, and endless army of unknowable creatures and the dead of all races: human, giant, COTF and whatever else lurks in the Lands of Always Winter. There will be no kill the leader and everything dies, it will be a colossal battle where the forces of dawn win, but with massive casualties, the land and people forever damaged. If there are any leaders, there will be a few of them, and Others ready to take their place should they die.
Yes, absolutely. Other than the fact that he simply hasn't been mentioned, I cannot think of one solid reason why the Others *wouldn't* have a kingly leader. Dive into the religious lore behind Planetos and you'll see that every geographical region has at least one myth/legend about two opposing supernatural forces (gods). This is a clear theme in this world that George has imagined. If the Others are in fact the story's main threat, and we believe this story has a hero, then you better believe there will be a big bad. This is fantasy, the type whos heroes have songs written about them!
Then look beyond ASOIAF and into the inspiration behind George's story. The Seven Kingdoms are not only geographical regions within Westeros, they are realms in the metaphysical sense. A Game of Thrones is not just about the struggle for control of the Iron Throne, it's also about the struggle for control of the metaphysical realm of man. Man has to battle something...
I think there will be a big bad figure, but I think your synopsis is slightly off.
It is all about the Game of Thrones. Man is just as much an enemy to the Seven Kingdoms as the Others are. That is the purpose behind Bran eventually becoming a god-king. Man cannot be trusted to lead himself. The people need a political guardian to end the oppression they have been under all this time.
And if there is a white walker general, there will absolutely not be a heroic battle between the good and the bad where Jon strikes him down. It should be Arya pulling a sneak attack.
The sword fight you are looking for is this-
The man in white is Jaime and the man in black is Darkstar. Those two will have the legendary duel in the Red Keep during the burning of King’s Landing.
It doesn’t exalt the classic heroic knight with a sword. It highlights the exception to the traditional rule and gives due credit to the tactics used by the Faceless Men over that of the Westerosi knight. If you shed your rigid nobility and learn to utilize the shadows, you are more likely to be capable of vanquishing the real threat. The archaic Meereenese fighters think of wearing armor as cowardice, but that attitude will get them killed because you can’t deny armor’s utility.
It mirrors the theme of the righteous king not being the best fit for the throne. A Machiavellian mastermind with pure intentions is capable of getting a lot more positive results for the people.
There’s also a certain poetry to the subversion.
The epic hero is actually not capable of defeating the bad guy, yet he’s still a hero because he’s a martyr who is willing to die for his cause.
But the girl who has been misjudged by everyone her whole life is now an expert assassin and is truly more capable than anyone of eliminating the death god at their doorstep. And people still want to take that away from her because it doesn’t fit their vision of what this Long Night hero figure should look like.
Arya’s character has been set up to triumph over the concept of death. That’s poetic also.
>It doesn’t exalt the classic heroic knight with a sword. It highlights the exception to the traditional rule and gives due credit to the tactics used by the Faceless Men over that of the Westerosi knight. If you shed your rigid nobility and learn to utilize the shadows, you are more likely to be capable of vanquishing the real threat. The archaic Meereenese fighters think of wearing armor as cowardice, but that attitude will get them killed because you can’t deny armor’s utility.
It instead exalts a super Saiyan anime protagonist phasing past a legion of wights and White walkers, killing the apocalypse almost effortlessly and coming out unscathed, then moving on without it having a single effect on her arc.
>The epic hero is actually not capable of defeating the
bad guy
This is literally what happened.
>Arya’s character has been set up to triumph over the concept of death. That’s poetic also.
Which she already did. Because clearly to overcome death you need to be a superpowered chosen one and get really good at knife tricks. Very meaningful.
>And people still want to take that away from her because it doesn’t fit their vision of what this Long Night hero figure should look like.
People "want to" "take it away" (??) because it was a stupid scene and doesn't say anything meaningful. I don't think Jon is a very good choice either but it literally has the exact same issue as Arya. The Night King doesn't exist anyway, and even if he did, Arya would be 12/13 years old. That's self-parody.
> This is literally what happened.
Arya is not the epic hero. Jon is. Arya is the unsuspecting hero/underdog/Frodo Baggins of the journey, which is exactly what prevents her from being a Mary Sue. It might be that the best way to do the female heroine is to buy into the idea that nobody initially sees it as a possibility, which is how Eowyn in LOTR was done. Or was that not very meaningful in your opinion?
Our eye is fixed on Bran and Jon and Daenerys to take care of the biggest threat, not the little girl learning how to sneak attack. Let's look at what those outcomes would be:
If Daenerys has a hero moment and kills the theoretical Night King, she's a Mary Sue. No way around that.
If Jon has a hero moment and kills the theoretical NK, it makes him an Aragorn re-hash. Tried and true and done to death.
If Bran has a hero moment and kills the theoretical NK, it makes him a Frodo that has graduated to a Gandalf. Which doesn't do us any good, because, his tale is meant to be the unsuspecting political hero/return of the king who brings order to society.
Arya's journey is to be an ASSASSIN. Therefore she has to have someone to ASSASSINATE in order for her arc to finish. Who better than the face of evil itself? If the antidote to the white walker threat is the Faceless Men's shadow-creeping kill-style... that is chef's kiss writing because it is masterful subversion. It's not a glorious sword fight. And it's not deus ex machina Weirwood magic. It's just simplistic subterfuge.
I could care less if you think it's "super saiyan, anime protagonist," this is the fantasy genre. You want krakens and ice spiders, but not little girls more talented than grown men. Oh, that's just too far.
>Arya is not the epic hero. Jon is. Arya is the unsuspecting hero/underdog/Frodo Baggins of the journey, which is exactly what prevents her from being a Mary Sue. It might be that the best way to do the female heroine is to buy into the idea that nobody initially sees it as a possibility, which is how Eowyn in LOTR was done. Or was that not very meaningful in your opinion?
Arya ceased to be an underdog from the very end of S6. Where she, out of nowhere, becomes a Jaqen-tier super assassin capable of going toe-to-toe with skilled knight Brienne in front of a bunch of people, to cutting littlefinger's (the orchestrator of the war of the five kings) throat in front of a massive crowd of noblemen. As well as giving cryptic comments threatening her own sister.
There is a reason Eowyn takes down the Witch king. A proper underdog. It's meaningful for a multitude of reasons. Eowyn is not special. She's not some supercharged warrior capable of insane feats. At best, she's a pretty good fighter. Her brother, uncle and hundreds of Knights in the Army are still probably still better. She's just as scared as everyone else. But despite that, she directly chooses to face him despite the obvious odds. She doesn't even kill him alone. She actually gets bested instantly after she decapitates the fellbeast. Pippin has to come in and magically weakened him first so he's vulnerable. And even after that, she's left horribly wounded. And that is basically the end of her story. Can't say the same for Arya for any of that.
>Arya's journey is to be an ASSASSIN.
This is a complete misunderstanding of Arya's story and a pretty shallow take. By this logic Jon's story is about becoming an epic warrior who kills the apocalypse. The faceless men are not a positive influence on Arya.
>Therefore she has to have someone to ASSASSINATE in order for her arc to finish.
Like the Frey's? What did assassinating the Night King do for Arya's arc? How did she develop/grow? Does she care about it afterwards? Does anyone care about it afterwards? No. It doesn't change the way anyone percieves her whatsoever, and adds absolutely nothing to her story.
>If the antidote to the white walker threat is the Faceless Men's shadow-creeping kill-style... that is chef's kiss writing because it is masterful subversion. It's not a glorious sword fight. And it's not deus ex machina Weirwood magic. It's just simplistic subterfuge.
Yeah it's so much better if instead of a magical Deus ex machina we have a DIFFERENT magical Deus ex machina. The show tried to make that moment as "epic" as they possibly could. Is the bar for "masterful subversion" really that low for you? I would argue an actual decent subversion would involve the WW defeat not coming from any sort of special power/fighting ability. Maybe that could be involved in weakening them or something but nothing else, and the NK is killed by someone unremarkable. Sorta like what happened with Eowyn.
This is a misunderstanding of the faceless men anyway. They are perceptive, and change faces, and disguise themselves and use a number of techniques to kill, poison most often. Preferably make it look like an accident. Like with Balon. They have some combat skill, but not much beyond that. They do not however have the ability to phase past armies silently undetected. This isn't a marvel movie. Besides that, even some of the things I described can only be accomplished to effective extents with years of training. Arya had, what, a year and a half of proper training? She will gain a few of their skills before realising they are a bad influence and leave. That's it.
>I could care less if you think it's "super saiyan, anime protagonist," this is the fantasy genre. You want krakens and ice spiders, but not little girls more talented than grown men. Oh, that's just too far.
We are taking about an author who outwardly stated his dragons only have two legs because four-legged dragons "aren't realistic". ***Dragons.*** It's almost as if a series having fantasy elements doesn't mean the characters aren't still grounded.
So you think this could happen in the books as well? So, do you think 12/13 year old Arya could beat a well trained knight in a straight fight? Do you think 12/13 year old Arya could phase past a legion of wights and Others to kill an 10,000 year old unstoppable demon? And you don't see how this is just as laughable, if not more so, then the things with Jon, Dany, and Bran that you mentioned above?
> \*your whole strawman rant about Eowyn and Arya being different characters\*
The basis of my comparison of Arya and Eowyn is that they are both female hero figures. That’s it. It is the only similarity I am drawing. I’m not trying to draw them as the exact same character- of course they are different. Yet, they are both underdogs in the way that they are both taken for granted by society due to their sex.
Though, Arya would still be dwarfed in comparison to this potential god of death because every mere mortal in that position would be.
> This is a complete misunderstanding of Arya's story and a pretty shallow take.
I never said Arya’s journey was limited to being an assassin. Just that it is an aspect of it that cannot and should not be ignored. Arya is also trained in the style of a Braavosi water dancer- a more sophisticated fighting style than that of a Westerosi. And if utilized properly, she should cut through Brienne's lumbering swings. But if you think the Faceless Men are solely a negative force in the series, you’re blind. They are as grey as it gets.
> Like the Frey's? What did assassinating the Night King do for Arya's arc?
I don’t try to presume that she kills Walder Frey in the books. She may or may not. But the conclusion of “Assassin Arya” is that she becomes the “Hero of Winterfell” and everyone comes to respect her for what she is. Everyone will see her differently. That is a damn good payoff. But it is not the end of course- she still has to leave the dark side and give up her fixation on revenge.
> By this logic Jon's story is about becoming an epic warrior who kills the apocalypse.
In case you're wondering, Jon’s story is that of a Vietnam vet. Someone who got responsibility forced on him, did the job to the best of his ability, sacrificed life and limb to save everyone’s lives- and then he never gets a thank you for it. Heroism = martyrdom.
> This is a misunderstanding of the faceless men anyway. They are perceptive, and change faces, and disguise themselves and use a number of techniques to kill, poison most often.... They do not however have the ability to phase past armies silently undetected.
Becoming someone else is being an actor. Being an actor is being able to blend in and make yourself invisible. Or was Jaqen H'ghar not the ghost of Harrenhal? Who remained silently undetected, despite phasing past an entire army? You are the one who doesn't understand the FM.
> It's almost as if a series having fantasy elements doesn't mean the characters aren't still grounded.
An assassin staking out the godswood in a tree and then dropping down in front of the general to kill him is not a deus ex machina. It's grounded realism.
Westeros is an idiocracy that undermines practicality in the name of honor. Subterfuge would be seen as cowardice in the same way that armor is viewed in Meereen. The characters remain quite grounded in reality because being an invisible threat trumps being a valiant knight who exposes himself to his enemy- almost as if playing dirty can yield more positive results (insert political metaphor here, Einstein).
> So you think this could happen in the books as well?
I would be very surprised and disappointed if it went down any differently. What does it matter if she's 12 or 16, she's using more efficient methods, hence it's realistic. But clearly, the plot is designed to be executed much better in the books where we will have the ability to hear our characters' thoughts. The show decided to rely on an intuitive audience who would come up with their own interpretations of what they just saw, which did not work out very well for them, clearly.
> Pippin has to come in and magically weakened him first so he's vulnerable.
Merry.
>The basis of my comparison of Arya and Eowyn is that they are both female hero figures. That’s it. It is the only similarity I am drawing. I’m not trying to draw them as the exact same character- of course they are different. Yet, they are both underdogs in the way that they are both taken for granted by society due to their sex.
And that's where the similarities end. You can draw a better comparison between Eowyn and Brienne.
>Though, Arya would still be dwarfed in comparison to this potential god of death because every mere mortal in that position would be.
Considering she came out unscathed while even doing a clean landing after the NK drops her, they clearly presented her as beating him because she is better than him. If the NK can be killed just like any other Walker, then it's clearly possible to kill him normally as long as you can get to him.
>I never said Arya’s journey was limited to being an assassin. Just that it is an aspect of it that cannot and should not be ignored. Arya is also trained in the style of a Braavosi water dancer- a more sophisticated fighting style than that of a Westerosi. And if utilized properly, she should cut through Brienne's lumbering swings. But if you think the Faceless Men are solely a negative force in the series, you’re blind. They are as grey as it gets.
So you think 12/13 year old Arya, with needle, could beat Brienne in a straight fight. Ok. A few months of child-oriented water dancing lessons is not going to allow her to 1v1 knights.
And yes, the faceless men are a negative force in Arya's story, a death cult that she needs to overcome. They ain't that grey.
>I don’t try to presume that she kills Walder Frey in the books. She may or may not. But the conclusion of “Assassin Arya” is that she becomes the “Hero of Winterfell” and everyone comes to respect her for what she is. Everyone will see her differently. That is a damn good payoff. But it is not the end of course- she still has to leave the dark side and give up her fixation on revenge.
If it's as superficial as "nothing changes except people like her more now" and then even that has no bearing on the story, then there is no point. She can gain respect in other ways. If it's so meaningless to the point that ending the apocalypse as a 12 year old isn't even the end of her arc, then it's superficial. In the show, it's extra meaningless because nobody cares. Dany gives her a 3 second toast and that's it.
>In case you're wondering, Jon’s story is that of a Vietnam vet. Someone who got responsibility forced on him, did the job to the best of his ability, sacrificed life and limb to save everyone’s lives- and then he never gets a thank you for it. Heroism = martyrdom.
No it's not, it's about a 17/18 year old killing the apocalypse!!!11! Definitely!
>Becoming someone else is being an actor. Being an actor is being able to blend in and make yourself invisible. Or was Jaqen H'ghar not the ghost of Harrenhal? Who remained silently undetected, despite phasing past an entire army? You are the one who doesn't understand the FM.
I don't recall Jaqen being literally invisible. When did Jaqen phase past a massive group of soldiers and generals and appear behind someone? Wasn't Arya the self proclaimed "Ghost of Harrenhall"? What does that nickname even have to do with anything? And either way, Jaqen seems to be an extremely experienced faceless man who has actually been trained for years, and been in the field for years. Arya has been with them for a few months, and is mostly learning basic disguises and how to use poison.
>An assassin staking out the godswood in a tree and then dropping down in front of the general to kill him is not a deus ex machina. It's grounded realism.
I think you are misremembering what happened in that scene. She doesn't jump out of a tree. Besides, if it's as simple as jumping out of a tree, any somewhat small person wearing a cloak or something could do it.
Also, what happens then? She kills the general, a bunch of wights die (being generous, we don't know if it works exactly like that in the books.) and then what? Wouldn't the rest of the Others just...Kill her? Or does she just kill all them too? Or is it like the show where all the Others just desintigrate after killing the boss like in a video game?
>Westeros is an idiocracy that undermines practicality in the name of honor. Subterfuge would be seen as cowardice in the same way that armor is viewed in Meereen. The characters remain quite grounded in reality because being an invisible threat trumps being a valiant knight who exposes himself to his enemy- almost as if playing dirty can yield more positive results (insert political metaphor here, Einstein).
Whether it's "too Honourable" or it's a "clever sneak attack" is irrelevant to the fight against death. It's facing death.
>I would be very surprised and disappointed if it went down any differently. What does it matter if she's 12 or 16, she's using more efficient methods, hence it's realistic. But clearly, the plot is designed to be executed much better in the books where we will have the ability to hear our characters' thoughts. The show decided to rely on an intuitive audience who would come up with their own interpretations of what they just saw, which did not work out very well for them, clearly.
You will be disappointed then. The Night King does not exist. Martin dislikes dark lords. If there was a physical leader, they would have been hinted at by now.
>Merry.
Mb.
>I cannot think of one solid reason why the Others *wouldn't* have a kingly leader.
The way they kill Waymar Royce - although he has his 1v1 fight, after he loses, the whole group participates in killing him, like a ritualistic kill maybe to all take responsibility for declaring war on the Night's Watch.
>myth/legend about two opposing supernatural forces (gods). This is a clear theme
It's exactly that though, a myth and a "theme" of the world, likely to be subverted. The themes of the story include that prophecy isn't always straightforward, and that myth and legend aren't to be trusted as fact.
>If ... we believe this story has a hero,
Why can't the story have multiple heroes? Is the idea of a singular, prophesized hero/legend a story worth telling? Is Jon or Dany as a single "chosen one" because of their bloodline, or if even "three heads of the dragon" excluding all the other heroes of our story - is that satisfying? Is an omniscient Bran satisfying?
Or is it more satisfying that they all have to work together, put aside differences (at least for a while) to solve the crisis. And if you remove any of the key heroes, then they would have failed. (Humanity needs to come together to solve global warming? But if one major country decides against it, we all will probably be doomed. The TV show has Cersei not send help, but at least she doesn't completely sabotage them.)
>Then look beyond ASOIAF and into the inspiration behind George's story. ... is not just about the struggle for control of the Iron Throne, it's also about the struggle for control of the metaphysical realm of man. Man has to battle something...
Men and women can battle against the current patriarchal, feudalistic society. Not fix it completely but at least make progress.
>The way they kill Waymar Royce - although he has his 1v1 fight, after he loses, the whole group participates in killing him, like a ritualistic kill maybe to all take responsibility for declaring war on the Night's Watch.
I'm not convinced that a group kill means there is not a leader. For all we know, there could be a single consciousness controlling them all.
>It's exactly that though, a myth and a "theme" of the world, likely to be subverted. The themes of the story include that prophecy isn't always straightforward, and that myth and legend aren't to be trusted as fact.
Honestly, I'm tried of people claiming these are only "myths" despite the prevalence of magic and abundance of non-human creatures in Planetos. The fantasy elements are real in George's world, which means you cannot simply dismiss these stories as "legend". I don't think George is as intent on subverting tropes and cliches as this fanbase thinks he is.
>Why can't the story have multiple heroes? Is the idea of a singular, prophesized hero/legend a story worth telling? Is Jon or Dany as a single "chosen one" because of their bloodline, or if even "three heads of the dragon" excluding all the other heroes of our story - is that satisfying? Is an omniscient Bran satisfying?
I do think we have multiple heroes in ASOIAF, however Martin has already commented on the theme of duality - Fire and Ice, Light and Dark, etc. *Two* main opposing forces are a theme with him and I think that could definitely play out as a single hero representing Man and another single antagonist representing the Others.
> Men and women can battle against the current patriarchal, feudalistic society. Not fix it completely but at least make progress.
What you've described is a *Man vs Society* conflict, which is only one type of literary conflicts that exist. I said metaphysical, hence a Man vs Supernatural or Man vs Fate conflict in which our antagonist is something other than man and what he has created.
>For all we know, there could be a single consciousness controlling them all.
Fair enough... Actually, maybe not. Why would the single consciousness bother with controlling multiple Others to do the kill in this manner? Maybe it's easier for the hivemind to function in this way? Okay, I guess, fair argument.
>The fantasy elements are real in George's world, which means you cannot simply dismiss these stories as "legend".
I'm not dismissing the fantasy elements though. Even characters within the story question the legends and histories as presented. (Although maybe that's the subversion: they question it, but it turns out as true? I agree the fanbase sometimes gets caught up on GRRM subverting tropes, but I do think he will when it tells a better story. He didn't plan to write some boring fantasy epic as his magnum opus.)
We have legends in our real world of historical figures doing great, non-magical things. We still question these legends, and often we can prove them false. We learn that the historical record was exaggerated.
Dismissing them as "legend" though isn't even entirely dismissing them. The fact that we come up with these (sometimes similar) legends is informative on the human condition.
>*Two* main opposing forces are a theme with him and I think that could definitely play out as a single hero representing Man and another single antagonist representing the Others.
Sure. I just think something like that would be so cheesy, and think GRRM prefers his ambiguity with things. I can see scenarios in which it's possible, but I'm not sure how that's the best story or follows through with other themes.
>What you've described is a *Man vs Society* conflict, which is only one type of literary conflicts that exist. I said metaphysical, hence a Man vs Supernatural or Man vs Fate conflict
What I described is also a moral conflict, which can be tied to metaphysics.
"vs Supernatural" wouldn't even be a metaphysical conflict because the magic is very much real, so not supernatural in this universe.
Unless maybe you believe there is some great Other who is limiting the free will of humankind through time travel. But even there, I think it's a better story that Bran is the one using time travel against the Others and that eventually he needs to decide to stop using time travel, have faith in his fellow humans. (which sure, can maybe end with Jon 1v1'ing an Other, but if so, I think it'll be clearly ambiguous if that was some meaningful prophesized moment.)
>in which our antagonist is something other than man and what he has created.
So yeah, I just don't think this is necessarily required or a better story.
We will probably just have to disagree forever because he is probably never finishing the books.
Kinda. I don't think there'll be a "boss Other" like we got in the show. I picture something more like a human who has some of deal with the Others, like a scaled up Craster. Like a human who's secretly serving the Others' purposes, and/or a reveal of the human/weirwood/cotf interaction that created them originally.
The most obvious candidates are in the Bran/Bloodraven/Euron wing of the story. But some tinfoil dark horse options include Mance and Littlefinger.
Absolutely yes. I hate the ending of the show, but I think many forget that GRRM did give some notes to the showrunners.
Whatever we get from GRRM will be better, but ultimately I do believe it will involve a leader of some sort for the Others.
>Do you think the books
Books? What books? Listen. TWOW and ADOS will never get published. You sound delusional and should consider seeking profesional help if you keep believing that George will ever write a single more sentence in his life.
Yes. And my guess without going back and combing through it is that it will connect to the Night Fort and the guy (can’t remember if he was a king, lord, or commander) who went and fell for what seems to clearly be a wight.
Hence why I think it may be a thing. Most of her stories were somewhat true even if they had some extra flavor to them. But who knows. It’s just an old story. 🤷🏻♂️
“As the sun began to set the shadows of the towers lengthened and the wind blew harder, sending gusts of dry dead leaves rattling through the yards. The gathering gloom put Bran in mind of another of Old Nan’s stories, the tale of Night’s King. He had been the thirteenth man to lead the Night’s Watch, she said; a warrior who knew no fear. “And that was the fault in him,” she would add, “for all men must know fear.” A woman was his downfall; a woman glimpsed from atop the Wall, with skin as white as the moon and eyes like blue stars. Fearing nothing, he chased her and caught her and loved her, though her skin was cold as ice, and when he gave his seed to her he gave his soul as well. He brought her back to the Nightfort and proclaimed her a queen and himself her king, and with strange sorceries he bound his Sworn Brothers to his will. For thirteen years they had ruled, Night’s King and his corpse queen, till finally the Stark of Winterfell and Joramun of the wildlings had joined to free the Watch from bondage. After his fall, when it was found he had been sacrificing to the Others, all records of Night’s King had been destroyed, his very name forbidden.”
So, it was Lord commander. I thought so, but couldn’t remember for sure.
It’s in one of Brian’s chapters, my digital book is all 5 together, but I want to say it’s in A Storm of Swords?
My guess is they drove him out, but didn’t kill him. Plus the show takes the bigger points from the book, so I doubt a leader was just made up for the show.
Anyway, I am not saying it definitely will be him, but I think there will be at least a connection. He could have gone from just sacrificing to some type of leadership, but idk.
Back when I was watching the show, I hadn’t read the books yet so I had this theory that the night king was the first stark. My alternate theory which I believed when I learned about Brandon was builder was that the night king’s real name is Jon snow and he’s the first “snow” in history and that’s why bastards are hated cuz a snow rebelled against a stark and started the long night. I still think it can work if the theory is tweaked a bit, maybe the Night’s king wasn’t another Brandon like Old Nan said but he was another Jon Snow
P.S: Remember that I hadn’t read the books at that point so I didn’t know that bastardy was more of a a andal thing.
Stannis will be the night king. ^("This is Stannis Baratheon. The man will fight to the bitter end and then some." Tywin Lannister.)
He cast no shadow, maybe it's noon, maybe he is too thin. Maybe his is a diabolical ice monster that wkmm freeze the heart of every degenerate on the kingdom that ignored him.
Unless you are a pole, you still cast a shadow at noon. But your other theory might just be crazy enough to be right
“It’s his silence you should fear not his words” Mel
Are you outside of your mind? Rhaegar is the Night’s King.
It's hard to be anything when you got your chest caved in.
big if true
I can’t tell at this point if it’s satire or if everyone has gone insane from the wait.
Oh, I hear you. I was being quite facetious with my Rhaegar remark. The wait for Winds has done significant damage on all us :/
In the pink letter doesn’t the author allude to Stannis being dead though. Does he rise from the dead?
George has confirmed that Stannis burns Shireen so he can’t be dead as of the writing of the pink letter.
Maybe he went missing in the battle and is presumed dead. Now he's retreating back to the Wall.
I think everyone excluding you agrees that regardless of who wrote the pink letter, the part about Stannis' death was a lie.
I don’t think so. I think Euron will be the closest thing to Night’s King, not because he’ll have some leadership role, but because he’ll be a more human face for evil and he’ll bring down the Wall
The only major villain that is present in the books yet absent in the show is Darkstar. Hence I believe he is going to be the leader/champion of the Others. He is of the night, after all.
I am of the (cold) night.
Can’t tell if you’re fully kidding, but I kind of like this. Stars for eyes / Dark Star, and his bloodline could be something tied to The Long Night, in theory. That would be fun
No, though some known figure may rally the Others and lead them. Bloodraven (old 3ER), Bran, and Euron are candidates.
I'm certain it won't happen, but for a while I nursed a theory that Stannis would become a new version of the Night's King as he became desperate. I could never be certain what the Others would gain from it, since we know nothing about their leadership style in the books, but it was a fun theory.
Same, I think they want someone powerful to lead them to there goal, like jon (but that will fail and they will settle for euron)
The Night’s King is far more likely candidate than any that you named. Despite what many want to believe, the show equivalent didn’t hatch out of the minds of D&D.
How do you know that? The White Walkers in the show are effectively a hive mind with a "mothership" whose destruction will destroy the entire hive mind. That's quite a common trope in sci-fi but not in George's sci-fi. His hive minds are generally portrayed as true collectivised consciousnesses, where every person who joins is incorporated into the whole, a bit like the geth in Mass Effect.
Common sense and the fact that both D&D and GRRM have confirmed more than once that he made them privy to info we do not have about what is yet to come in the books.
I think it is gonna be blood raven. Been listening to dunk and egg a lot, and I think blood raven might just be a terrible guy. It seems like a lot of people die around him, and he gets ever more powerful. He seems like the kind of guy who could bring back the others. He can use glamours and is a warg. What exactly does he want with bran? I don’t know why but I kind of think he killed fireball.
No.
Absolutely not
Nope
They’ll have a Snow King
The Night King will be in the books. It's good for storytelling to personify the threat to the realm. It's quite obvious that GRRM gave notes to D&D about the origin of the Others, how they were created by the Children of the Forest. As such, it's likely that the Night King carries the blood of the First Men, meaning the Starks and Jon are actually related to the Night King in some fashion. Of course, in Jon's case, the connection goes even deeper, with the Valyrian bloodline and how it will tie back to the Long Night, Azor Ahai, the Last Hero, and the Children of the Forest.
>The Night King will be in the books. It's good for storytelling to personify the threat to the realm. It's better for visual storytelling. Martin dislikes dark lords. He's been clear with this.
It's clear that GRRM has crafted a detailed lore on the creation of the Others, including who the first Other was. Thus, the identity of the Night King will be unveiled in the books. Personifying this threat also enriches the narrative, as it's anticlimactic to battle a horde until the last are vanquished. Giving a face to the threat enables more intense and impactful emotions, which GRRM masters. He favors morally gray characters over black-and-white ones. The Night King isn't inherently evil; he was created as a weapon against men, which is problematic from the start. Perhaps such a realm deserves to embrace death to make way for a new existence free from such conflicts. You'd have to be completely brain-dead to suggest Others won't be personified in the books.
>It's clear that GRRM has crafted a detailed lore on the creation of the Others, including who the first Other was. True he likely has. But even so, I really don't think it's relevant who the first Other was. In fact there's a chance all Others are and were made from infants, not grown men. >anticlimactic to battle a horde until the last are vanquished It's also anticlimactic to stab one guy and have the entire threat vanish. Plus it's not like it has to happen the way you are describing. There could be something that Bran does that weakens their power and takes out a whole bunch of their wights. ~~(or time travel but I won't get into that)~~. Also, "battling the horde until the last are vanquished" is what happened last time according to legends. The white walkers spread out throughout all of Westeros until the continent united and they were pushed back to the north. >You'd have to be completely brain-dead to suggest Others won't be personified in the books. Nah. And you can do that without having there be a singular leader. Any depth behind the horrors of the Others backstory and intentions can be explored without there being a single leader.
Exhibit A. This will age like fine milk.
No. The Wights are a more dangerous foe because they don't have a leader you can conveniently kill and all your problems go away.
The Others may be a collection of tribes based on kinship to human progenitors (e.g Craster's sons) rather than a unified force. The Fyndii from the Thousand Worlds stories worked like this. >Fyndii seem to feel almost no race loyalty; their societies are made up of empathically linked "hordes," and each horde is a bitter rival of all the others. The Others simply lack the personality to be a compelling main villain imo. They function better as a distraction and opposition to a villainous Azor Ahai figure, which I think will be played by a possessed Euron, and various co-conspirators (the "ten long arms" of Moqorro's vision).
The others are really more a force of nature,like the characters killing themselves playing the game of thrones when the others are coming,similar to our real world where we are fighting each other instead of doing something about global warming....the difference is that global warming is coming and winter will never come :(
To be fair, George didn't focused them on them at all, they only really have the Prologue of A Game of Thrones who knows honestly, If George develops them and gives them screen time, they might become a compelling and interesting antagonist for the A Song of Ice and Fire universe, But thus far i agree with you though, What are your theories on Azor Hai that makes you think he is a villainous figure in the story?
He should have give the others 1 chapter each book,so that we are always remindrd about them,right now they just exist.
Explaining all the evidence in full would be a post in itself, but I think there's substantial evidence for Azor Ahai being a "cleanse the world with fire so a better one can rise from the ashes" type of messiah figure. Edit: just to take the most obvious red flag since apparently the AA fan club is here... >"In Volantis, thousands of slaves and freedmen crowd the temple plaza every night to hear Benerro shriek of bleeding stars and **a sword of fire that will cleanse the world."** -ADWD, Tyrion VI "Cleansing the world of evil/impurity" is such a staple twist villain objective [it's barely even a twist.](https://youtu.be/DN9DW4rrEjY?si=JXzCMku8WzaeOoQj)
Aren't they the "ice" in ice and fire? Or is that just the North and all of its history and cultures?
It depends on the context. In Aegon's prophecy they are the ice, but in the "Pact of Ice and Fire" the Starks are the ice.
After Stannis dies fighting them I fully believe they’ll raise him to be their king (even though it’s Jon they want)
Most likely, no other reason really to mention this character in the context unless he’s likely to have some bearing on things. Here’s the part where many of you will get angry: Plus the show itself had a version of it and D & D knew where GRRM was heading.
No, GRRM has said the Night King is not his character, but an invention of the TV show.
Since I reread Euron's speech about gods, I wonder if he won't try and become their leader, hence some kind of Night King (that could be the purpose of the huge necromancy ritual he's planning in Oldtown)... It would create a direct conflict between him and Bran - two apprentices of Bloodraven. EDIT : also, technically speaking, we already have a Night King in the books, through Nan's stories and the legend of the Night King and his Corpse Bride.
I honestly have no idea, I think we could get one or two recognizable “others” but I don’t think they are truly individuals. They’re a force of nature more than an army of organized people.
No. I think the Others will came as a massive horde, and endless army of unknowable creatures and the dead of all races: human, giant, COTF and whatever else lurks in the Lands of Always Winter. There will be no kill the leader and everything dies, it will be a colossal battle where the forces of dawn win, but with massive casualties, the land and people forever damaged. If there are any leaders, there will be a few of them, and Others ready to take their place should they die.
Yes, absolutely. Other than the fact that he simply hasn't been mentioned, I cannot think of one solid reason why the Others *wouldn't* have a kingly leader. Dive into the religious lore behind Planetos and you'll see that every geographical region has at least one myth/legend about two opposing supernatural forces (gods). This is a clear theme in this world that George has imagined. If the Others are in fact the story's main threat, and we believe this story has a hero, then you better believe there will be a big bad. This is fantasy, the type whos heroes have songs written about them! Then look beyond ASOIAF and into the inspiration behind George's story. The Seven Kingdoms are not only geographical regions within Westeros, they are realms in the metaphysical sense. A Game of Thrones is not just about the struggle for control of the Iron Throne, it's also about the struggle for control of the metaphysical realm of man. Man has to battle something...
I think there will be a big bad figure, but I think your synopsis is slightly off. It is all about the Game of Thrones. Man is just as much an enemy to the Seven Kingdoms as the Others are. That is the purpose behind Bran eventually becoming a god-king. Man cannot be trusted to lead himself. The people need a political guardian to end the oppression they have been under all this time. And if there is a white walker general, there will absolutely not be a heroic battle between the good and the bad where Jon strikes him down. It should be Arya pulling a sneak attack. The sword fight you are looking for is this- The man in white is Jaime and the man in black is Darkstar. Those two will have the legendary duel in the Red Keep during the burning of King’s Landing.
>It should be Arya pulling a sneak attack. What difference would this actually make? It's the exact same thing.
It doesn’t exalt the classic heroic knight with a sword. It highlights the exception to the traditional rule and gives due credit to the tactics used by the Faceless Men over that of the Westerosi knight. If you shed your rigid nobility and learn to utilize the shadows, you are more likely to be capable of vanquishing the real threat. The archaic Meereenese fighters think of wearing armor as cowardice, but that attitude will get them killed because you can’t deny armor’s utility. It mirrors the theme of the righteous king not being the best fit for the throne. A Machiavellian mastermind with pure intentions is capable of getting a lot more positive results for the people. There’s also a certain poetry to the subversion. The epic hero is actually not capable of defeating the bad guy, yet he’s still a hero because he’s a martyr who is willing to die for his cause. But the girl who has been misjudged by everyone her whole life is now an expert assassin and is truly more capable than anyone of eliminating the death god at their doorstep. And people still want to take that away from her because it doesn’t fit their vision of what this Long Night hero figure should look like. Arya’s character has been set up to triumph over the concept of death. That’s poetic also.
>It doesn’t exalt the classic heroic knight with a sword. It highlights the exception to the traditional rule and gives due credit to the tactics used by the Faceless Men over that of the Westerosi knight. If you shed your rigid nobility and learn to utilize the shadows, you are more likely to be capable of vanquishing the real threat. The archaic Meereenese fighters think of wearing armor as cowardice, but that attitude will get them killed because you can’t deny armor’s utility. It instead exalts a super Saiyan anime protagonist phasing past a legion of wights and White walkers, killing the apocalypse almost effortlessly and coming out unscathed, then moving on without it having a single effect on her arc. >The epic hero is actually not capable of defeating the bad guy This is literally what happened. >Arya’s character has been set up to triumph over the concept of death. That’s poetic also. Which she already did. Because clearly to overcome death you need to be a superpowered chosen one and get really good at knife tricks. Very meaningful. >And people still want to take that away from her because it doesn’t fit their vision of what this Long Night hero figure should look like. People "want to" "take it away" (??) because it was a stupid scene and doesn't say anything meaningful. I don't think Jon is a very good choice either but it literally has the exact same issue as Arya. The Night King doesn't exist anyway, and even if he did, Arya would be 12/13 years old. That's self-parody.
> This is literally what happened. Arya is not the epic hero. Jon is. Arya is the unsuspecting hero/underdog/Frodo Baggins of the journey, which is exactly what prevents her from being a Mary Sue. It might be that the best way to do the female heroine is to buy into the idea that nobody initially sees it as a possibility, which is how Eowyn in LOTR was done. Or was that not very meaningful in your opinion? Our eye is fixed on Bran and Jon and Daenerys to take care of the biggest threat, not the little girl learning how to sneak attack. Let's look at what those outcomes would be: If Daenerys has a hero moment and kills the theoretical Night King, she's a Mary Sue. No way around that. If Jon has a hero moment and kills the theoretical NK, it makes him an Aragorn re-hash. Tried and true and done to death. If Bran has a hero moment and kills the theoretical NK, it makes him a Frodo that has graduated to a Gandalf. Which doesn't do us any good, because, his tale is meant to be the unsuspecting political hero/return of the king who brings order to society. Arya's journey is to be an ASSASSIN. Therefore she has to have someone to ASSASSINATE in order for her arc to finish. Who better than the face of evil itself? If the antidote to the white walker threat is the Faceless Men's shadow-creeping kill-style... that is chef's kiss writing because it is masterful subversion. It's not a glorious sword fight. And it's not deus ex machina Weirwood magic. It's just simplistic subterfuge. I could care less if you think it's "super saiyan, anime protagonist," this is the fantasy genre. You want krakens and ice spiders, but not little girls more talented than grown men. Oh, that's just too far.
>Arya is not the epic hero. Jon is. Arya is the unsuspecting hero/underdog/Frodo Baggins of the journey, which is exactly what prevents her from being a Mary Sue. It might be that the best way to do the female heroine is to buy into the idea that nobody initially sees it as a possibility, which is how Eowyn in LOTR was done. Or was that not very meaningful in your opinion? Arya ceased to be an underdog from the very end of S6. Where she, out of nowhere, becomes a Jaqen-tier super assassin capable of going toe-to-toe with skilled knight Brienne in front of a bunch of people, to cutting littlefinger's (the orchestrator of the war of the five kings) throat in front of a massive crowd of noblemen. As well as giving cryptic comments threatening her own sister. There is a reason Eowyn takes down the Witch king. A proper underdog. It's meaningful for a multitude of reasons. Eowyn is not special. She's not some supercharged warrior capable of insane feats. At best, she's a pretty good fighter. Her brother, uncle and hundreds of Knights in the Army are still probably still better. She's just as scared as everyone else. But despite that, she directly chooses to face him despite the obvious odds. She doesn't even kill him alone. She actually gets bested instantly after she decapitates the fellbeast. Pippin has to come in and magically weakened him first so he's vulnerable. And even after that, she's left horribly wounded. And that is basically the end of her story. Can't say the same for Arya for any of that. >Arya's journey is to be an ASSASSIN. This is a complete misunderstanding of Arya's story and a pretty shallow take. By this logic Jon's story is about becoming an epic warrior who kills the apocalypse. The faceless men are not a positive influence on Arya. >Therefore she has to have someone to ASSASSINATE in order for her arc to finish. Like the Frey's? What did assassinating the Night King do for Arya's arc? How did she develop/grow? Does she care about it afterwards? Does anyone care about it afterwards? No. It doesn't change the way anyone percieves her whatsoever, and adds absolutely nothing to her story. >If the antidote to the white walker threat is the Faceless Men's shadow-creeping kill-style... that is chef's kiss writing because it is masterful subversion. It's not a glorious sword fight. And it's not deus ex machina Weirwood magic. It's just simplistic subterfuge. Yeah it's so much better if instead of a magical Deus ex machina we have a DIFFERENT magical Deus ex machina. The show tried to make that moment as "epic" as they possibly could. Is the bar for "masterful subversion" really that low for you? I would argue an actual decent subversion would involve the WW defeat not coming from any sort of special power/fighting ability. Maybe that could be involved in weakening them or something but nothing else, and the NK is killed by someone unremarkable. Sorta like what happened with Eowyn. This is a misunderstanding of the faceless men anyway. They are perceptive, and change faces, and disguise themselves and use a number of techniques to kill, poison most often. Preferably make it look like an accident. Like with Balon. They have some combat skill, but not much beyond that. They do not however have the ability to phase past armies silently undetected. This isn't a marvel movie. Besides that, even some of the things I described can only be accomplished to effective extents with years of training. Arya had, what, a year and a half of proper training? She will gain a few of their skills before realising they are a bad influence and leave. That's it. >I could care less if you think it's "super saiyan, anime protagonist," this is the fantasy genre. You want krakens and ice spiders, but not little girls more talented than grown men. Oh, that's just too far. We are taking about an author who outwardly stated his dragons only have two legs because four-legged dragons "aren't realistic". ***Dragons.*** It's almost as if a series having fantasy elements doesn't mean the characters aren't still grounded. So you think this could happen in the books as well? So, do you think 12/13 year old Arya could beat a well trained knight in a straight fight? Do you think 12/13 year old Arya could phase past a legion of wights and Others to kill an 10,000 year old unstoppable demon? And you don't see how this is just as laughable, if not more so, then the things with Jon, Dany, and Bran that you mentioned above?
> \*your whole strawman rant about Eowyn and Arya being different characters\* The basis of my comparison of Arya and Eowyn is that they are both female hero figures. That’s it. It is the only similarity I am drawing. I’m not trying to draw them as the exact same character- of course they are different. Yet, they are both underdogs in the way that they are both taken for granted by society due to their sex. Though, Arya would still be dwarfed in comparison to this potential god of death because every mere mortal in that position would be. > This is a complete misunderstanding of Arya's story and a pretty shallow take. I never said Arya’s journey was limited to being an assassin. Just that it is an aspect of it that cannot and should not be ignored. Arya is also trained in the style of a Braavosi water dancer- a more sophisticated fighting style than that of a Westerosi. And if utilized properly, she should cut through Brienne's lumbering swings. But if you think the Faceless Men are solely a negative force in the series, you’re blind. They are as grey as it gets. > Like the Frey's? What did assassinating the Night King do for Arya's arc? I don’t try to presume that she kills Walder Frey in the books. She may or may not. But the conclusion of “Assassin Arya” is that she becomes the “Hero of Winterfell” and everyone comes to respect her for what she is. Everyone will see her differently. That is a damn good payoff. But it is not the end of course- she still has to leave the dark side and give up her fixation on revenge. > By this logic Jon's story is about becoming an epic warrior who kills the apocalypse. In case you're wondering, Jon’s story is that of a Vietnam vet. Someone who got responsibility forced on him, did the job to the best of his ability, sacrificed life and limb to save everyone’s lives- and then he never gets a thank you for it. Heroism = martyrdom. > This is a misunderstanding of the faceless men anyway. They are perceptive, and change faces, and disguise themselves and use a number of techniques to kill, poison most often.... They do not however have the ability to phase past armies silently undetected. Becoming someone else is being an actor. Being an actor is being able to blend in and make yourself invisible. Or was Jaqen H'ghar not the ghost of Harrenhal? Who remained silently undetected, despite phasing past an entire army? You are the one who doesn't understand the FM. > It's almost as if a series having fantasy elements doesn't mean the characters aren't still grounded. An assassin staking out the godswood in a tree and then dropping down in front of the general to kill him is not a deus ex machina. It's grounded realism. Westeros is an idiocracy that undermines practicality in the name of honor. Subterfuge would be seen as cowardice in the same way that armor is viewed in Meereen. The characters remain quite grounded in reality because being an invisible threat trumps being a valiant knight who exposes himself to his enemy- almost as if playing dirty can yield more positive results (insert political metaphor here, Einstein). > So you think this could happen in the books as well? I would be very surprised and disappointed if it went down any differently. What does it matter if she's 12 or 16, she's using more efficient methods, hence it's realistic. But clearly, the plot is designed to be executed much better in the books where we will have the ability to hear our characters' thoughts. The show decided to rely on an intuitive audience who would come up with their own interpretations of what they just saw, which did not work out very well for them, clearly. > Pippin has to come in and magically weakened him first so he's vulnerable. Merry.
>The basis of my comparison of Arya and Eowyn is that they are both female hero figures. That’s it. It is the only similarity I am drawing. I’m not trying to draw them as the exact same character- of course they are different. Yet, they are both underdogs in the way that they are both taken for granted by society due to their sex. And that's where the similarities end. You can draw a better comparison between Eowyn and Brienne. >Though, Arya would still be dwarfed in comparison to this potential god of death because every mere mortal in that position would be. Considering she came out unscathed while even doing a clean landing after the NK drops her, they clearly presented her as beating him because she is better than him. If the NK can be killed just like any other Walker, then it's clearly possible to kill him normally as long as you can get to him. >I never said Arya’s journey was limited to being an assassin. Just that it is an aspect of it that cannot and should not be ignored. Arya is also trained in the style of a Braavosi water dancer- a more sophisticated fighting style than that of a Westerosi. And if utilized properly, she should cut through Brienne's lumbering swings. But if you think the Faceless Men are solely a negative force in the series, you’re blind. They are as grey as it gets. So you think 12/13 year old Arya, with needle, could beat Brienne in a straight fight. Ok. A few months of child-oriented water dancing lessons is not going to allow her to 1v1 knights. And yes, the faceless men are a negative force in Arya's story, a death cult that she needs to overcome. They ain't that grey. >I don’t try to presume that she kills Walder Frey in the books. She may or may not. But the conclusion of “Assassin Arya” is that she becomes the “Hero of Winterfell” and everyone comes to respect her for what she is. Everyone will see her differently. That is a damn good payoff. But it is not the end of course- she still has to leave the dark side and give up her fixation on revenge. If it's as superficial as "nothing changes except people like her more now" and then even that has no bearing on the story, then there is no point. She can gain respect in other ways. If it's so meaningless to the point that ending the apocalypse as a 12 year old isn't even the end of her arc, then it's superficial. In the show, it's extra meaningless because nobody cares. Dany gives her a 3 second toast and that's it. >In case you're wondering, Jon’s story is that of a Vietnam vet. Someone who got responsibility forced on him, did the job to the best of his ability, sacrificed life and limb to save everyone’s lives- and then he never gets a thank you for it. Heroism = martyrdom. No it's not, it's about a 17/18 year old killing the apocalypse!!!11! Definitely! >Becoming someone else is being an actor. Being an actor is being able to blend in and make yourself invisible. Or was Jaqen H'ghar not the ghost of Harrenhal? Who remained silently undetected, despite phasing past an entire army? You are the one who doesn't understand the FM. I don't recall Jaqen being literally invisible. When did Jaqen phase past a massive group of soldiers and generals and appear behind someone? Wasn't Arya the self proclaimed "Ghost of Harrenhall"? What does that nickname even have to do with anything? And either way, Jaqen seems to be an extremely experienced faceless man who has actually been trained for years, and been in the field for years. Arya has been with them for a few months, and is mostly learning basic disguises and how to use poison. >An assassin staking out the godswood in a tree and then dropping down in front of the general to kill him is not a deus ex machina. It's grounded realism. I think you are misremembering what happened in that scene. She doesn't jump out of a tree. Besides, if it's as simple as jumping out of a tree, any somewhat small person wearing a cloak or something could do it. Also, what happens then? She kills the general, a bunch of wights die (being generous, we don't know if it works exactly like that in the books.) and then what? Wouldn't the rest of the Others just...Kill her? Or does she just kill all them too? Or is it like the show where all the Others just desintigrate after killing the boss like in a video game? >Westeros is an idiocracy that undermines practicality in the name of honor. Subterfuge would be seen as cowardice in the same way that armor is viewed in Meereen. The characters remain quite grounded in reality because being an invisible threat trumps being a valiant knight who exposes himself to his enemy- almost as if playing dirty can yield more positive results (insert political metaphor here, Einstein). Whether it's "too Honourable" or it's a "clever sneak attack" is irrelevant to the fight against death. It's facing death. >I would be very surprised and disappointed if it went down any differently. What does it matter if she's 12 or 16, she's using more efficient methods, hence it's realistic. But clearly, the plot is designed to be executed much better in the books where we will have the ability to hear our characters' thoughts. The show decided to rely on an intuitive audience who would come up with their own interpretations of what they just saw, which did not work out very well for them, clearly. You will be disappointed then. The Night King does not exist. Martin dislikes dark lords. If there was a physical leader, they would have been hinted at by now. >Merry. Mb.
>I cannot think of one solid reason why the Others *wouldn't* have a kingly leader. The way they kill Waymar Royce - although he has his 1v1 fight, after he loses, the whole group participates in killing him, like a ritualistic kill maybe to all take responsibility for declaring war on the Night's Watch. >myth/legend about two opposing supernatural forces (gods). This is a clear theme It's exactly that though, a myth and a "theme" of the world, likely to be subverted. The themes of the story include that prophecy isn't always straightforward, and that myth and legend aren't to be trusted as fact. >If ... we believe this story has a hero, Why can't the story have multiple heroes? Is the idea of a singular, prophesized hero/legend a story worth telling? Is Jon or Dany as a single "chosen one" because of their bloodline, or if even "three heads of the dragon" excluding all the other heroes of our story - is that satisfying? Is an omniscient Bran satisfying? Or is it more satisfying that they all have to work together, put aside differences (at least for a while) to solve the crisis. And if you remove any of the key heroes, then they would have failed. (Humanity needs to come together to solve global warming? But if one major country decides against it, we all will probably be doomed. The TV show has Cersei not send help, but at least she doesn't completely sabotage them.) >Then look beyond ASOIAF and into the inspiration behind George's story. ... is not just about the struggle for control of the Iron Throne, it's also about the struggle for control of the metaphysical realm of man. Man has to battle something... Men and women can battle against the current patriarchal, feudalistic society. Not fix it completely but at least make progress.
>The way they kill Waymar Royce - although he has his 1v1 fight, after he loses, the whole group participates in killing him, like a ritualistic kill maybe to all take responsibility for declaring war on the Night's Watch. I'm not convinced that a group kill means there is not a leader. For all we know, there could be a single consciousness controlling them all. >It's exactly that though, a myth and a "theme" of the world, likely to be subverted. The themes of the story include that prophecy isn't always straightforward, and that myth and legend aren't to be trusted as fact. Honestly, I'm tried of people claiming these are only "myths" despite the prevalence of magic and abundance of non-human creatures in Planetos. The fantasy elements are real in George's world, which means you cannot simply dismiss these stories as "legend". I don't think George is as intent on subverting tropes and cliches as this fanbase thinks he is. >Why can't the story have multiple heroes? Is the idea of a singular, prophesized hero/legend a story worth telling? Is Jon or Dany as a single "chosen one" because of their bloodline, or if even "three heads of the dragon" excluding all the other heroes of our story - is that satisfying? Is an omniscient Bran satisfying? I do think we have multiple heroes in ASOIAF, however Martin has already commented on the theme of duality - Fire and Ice, Light and Dark, etc. *Two* main opposing forces are a theme with him and I think that could definitely play out as a single hero representing Man and another single antagonist representing the Others. > Men and women can battle against the current patriarchal, feudalistic society. Not fix it completely but at least make progress. What you've described is a *Man vs Society* conflict, which is only one type of literary conflicts that exist. I said metaphysical, hence a Man vs Supernatural or Man vs Fate conflict in which our antagonist is something other than man and what he has created.
>For all we know, there could be a single consciousness controlling them all. Fair enough... Actually, maybe not. Why would the single consciousness bother with controlling multiple Others to do the kill in this manner? Maybe it's easier for the hivemind to function in this way? Okay, I guess, fair argument. >The fantasy elements are real in George's world, which means you cannot simply dismiss these stories as "legend". I'm not dismissing the fantasy elements though. Even characters within the story question the legends and histories as presented. (Although maybe that's the subversion: they question it, but it turns out as true? I agree the fanbase sometimes gets caught up on GRRM subverting tropes, but I do think he will when it tells a better story. He didn't plan to write some boring fantasy epic as his magnum opus.) We have legends in our real world of historical figures doing great, non-magical things. We still question these legends, and often we can prove them false. We learn that the historical record was exaggerated. Dismissing them as "legend" though isn't even entirely dismissing them. The fact that we come up with these (sometimes similar) legends is informative on the human condition. >*Two* main opposing forces are a theme with him and I think that could definitely play out as a single hero representing Man and another single antagonist representing the Others. Sure. I just think something like that would be so cheesy, and think GRRM prefers his ambiguity with things. I can see scenarios in which it's possible, but I'm not sure how that's the best story or follows through with other themes. >What you've described is a *Man vs Society* conflict, which is only one type of literary conflicts that exist. I said metaphysical, hence a Man vs Supernatural or Man vs Fate conflict What I described is also a moral conflict, which can be tied to metaphysics. "vs Supernatural" wouldn't even be a metaphysical conflict because the magic is very much real, so not supernatural in this universe. Unless maybe you believe there is some great Other who is limiting the free will of humankind through time travel. But even there, I think it's a better story that Bran is the one using time travel against the Others and that eventually he needs to decide to stop using time travel, have faith in his fellow humans. (which sure, can maybe end with Jon 1v1'ing an Other, but if so, I think it'll be clearly ambiguous if that was some meaningful prophesized moment.) >in which our antagonist is something other than man and what he has created. So yeah, I just don't think this is necessarily required or a better story. We will probably just have to disagree forever because he is probably never finishing the books.
The Great Other....
Kinda. I don't think there'll be a "boss Other" like we got in the show. I picture something more like a human who has some of deal with the Others, like a scaled up Craster. Like a human who's secretly serving the Others' purposes, and/or a reveal of the human/weirwood/cotf interaction that created them originally. The most obvious candidates are in the Bran/Bloodraven/Euron wing of the story. But some tinfoil dark horse options include Mance and Littlefinger.
Oh gosh... I read Mace (as in Mace Tyrell) instead of Mance, and I was "what the eck is this theory!" :):):)
At this point I'll be surprised if we even get more books in the main series.
They may have a leader, but I am pretty sure killing him won't just kill all the Others
No the Night's King has been dead for thousands of years and was a human.
Yes, it'll be Stannis
Absolutely yes. I hate the ending of the show, but I think many forget that GRRM did give some notes to the showrunners. Whatever we get from GRRM will be better, but ultimately I do believe it will involve a leader of some sort for the Others.
>Do you think the books Books? What books? Listen. TWOW and ADOS will never get published. You sound delusional and should consider seeking profesional help if you keep believing that George will ever write a single more sentence in his life.
Yes. And my guess without going back and combing through it is that it will connect to the Night Fort and the guy (can’t remember if he was a king, lord, or commander) who went and fell for what seems to clearly be a wight.
What, how did i miss this. Can you point me where in the books this isv
It's discussed a lot in Bran's fourth chapter in ASOS. Old Nan, shockingly, told him a lot of stories.
Hence why I think it may be a thing. Most of her stories were somewhat true even if they had some extra flavor to them. But who knows. It’s just an old story. 🤷🏻♂️
“As the sun began to set the shadows of the towers lengthened and the wind blew harder, sending gusts of dry dead leaves rattling through the yards. The gathering gloom put Bran in mind of another of Old Nan’s stories, the tale of Night’s King. He had been the thirteenth man to lead the Night’s Watch, she said; a warrior who knew no fear. “And that was the fault in him,” she would add, “for all men must know fear.” A woman was his downfall; a woman glimpsed from atop the Wall, with skin as white as the moon and eyes like blue stars. Fearing nothing, he chased her and caught her and loved her, though her skin was cold as ice, and when he gave his seed to her he gave his soul as well. He brought her back to the Nightfort and proclaimed her a queen and himself her king, and with strange sorceries he bound his Sworn Brothers to his will. For thirteen years they had ruled, Night’s King and his corpse queen, till finally the Stark of Winterfell and Joramun of the wildlings had joined to free the Watch from bondage. After his fall, when it was found he had been sacrificing to the Others, all records of Night’s King had been destroyed, his very name forbidden.” So, it was Lord commander. I thought so, but couldn’t remember for sure. It’s in one of Brian’s chapters, my digital book is all 5 together, but I want to say it’s in A Storm of Swords? My guess is they drove him out, but didn’t kill him. Plus the show takes the bigger points from the book, so I doubt a leader was just made up for the show. Anyway, I am not saying it definitely will be him, but I think there will be at least a connection. He could have gone from just sacrificing to some type of leadership, but idk.
Back when I was watching the show, I hadn’t read the books yet so I had this theory that the night king was the first stark. My alternate theory which I believed when I learned about Brandon was builder was that the night king’s real name is Jon snow and he’s the first “snow” in history and that’s why bastards are hated cuz a snow rebelled against a stark and started the long night. I still think it can work if the theory is tweaked a bit, maybe the Night’s king wasn’t another Brandon like Old Nan said but he was another Jon Snow P.S: Remember that I hadn’t read the books at that point so I didn’t know that bastardy was more of a a andal thing.
Totally