It wasn’t fearing for its life, it was simply alerting the other wights, and it is 100% the only thing it could have done. I don’t think it was an attempt to show us anything, other than that the wights are not mindless automatons, which we pretty much already knew. Going into alarm mode was not meant to convey fear, only that there was more of the dead nearby and our heroes were in trouble.
If that was what the show was trying to convey, it did a poor job. And it’s hard to see how the free folk are better off as prisoners or refugees than as small farmers in a fairly stable kingdom, even one in which small farmers sometimes get conscripted.
If that wight survived because it was created by a different WW than the one killed… I don’t understand how the corpses that were brought behind the wall were reanimated if it takes a direct action by a specific WW to do it? This would seem to require that they are assigned territories for reanimation of corpses without direct knowledge or action. Any ideas?
I think corpses are assigned to White Walkers in blocks according to their social security numbers.
I don’t think the mechancs of this really matter. Maybe they were reanimated in advance and then left dormant with a trigger to spring into action when, for example, arriving at Castle Black and getting a chance to kill important across. But whatever. They don’t owe us a manual on the care and feeding of zombies.
Stannis was planning to use them in his wars first. The survivors were meant to become “citizens of the realm”. Which is, historically speaking, an interesting phrase and quite fitting under the circumstances that Stannis describes.
It is a good offer. Or it could have been - if taking Winterfell were the end of it. But it would just have been the beginning of their … service.
And yet, the wildlings ended up in the thick of the northern wars anyway, and it’s hard to see a way out of this, unless they would have fled far into the south (which would have led them into conflicts they could not hope to win or even survive) or across the sea (which would have been close to impossible to do for so many people without getting into even more conflicts with professional armies or without groups of them ending up in servitude to anyone willing to carry them far away).
Mance knew that the free folk had to stay in the north because it was the only region where they could assimilate into the population over time - but he neither understood the enemy south of the Wall well enough nor the enemy north of it at all.
He is a tragic figure - whatever decisions he made, they were bound to refuse him his goals.
Of course, the fate of the wildlings foreshadows the fate of everyone else in Westeros, unless, well …
You left out the context of the conversation by starting where you did. Let’s go back a little farther:
The relevant discussion starts when Sansa complains that she doesn’t know if she can trust the Lords in the north, because they are being asked to do something very difficult, and have shown middling allegiance in the past. The immediate subject is what the ramifications will be if Arya shows them the letter.
You can’t get, “Littlefinger is suggesting that Brienne should murder Arya” out of that - especially since Littlefinger just said that she was sworn to protect BOTH girls. At best, he was suggesting that Sansa tell Brienne what Arya has and what she might do, and have Brienne intervene as a character witness for Sansa, or attempt to intimidate Arya or appeal to her honor, or simply lock up Arya until Jon gets back. Something like that. But she definitely would not kill Arya, and both Sansa and Littlefinger know that.
Now, the subtext there could be that if Arya has to be removed, Brienne is going to be a problem precisely because she is sworn to protect her. That might be what Sansa was thinking, and why she sent Brienne away - just in case Arya is out of control and needs to be dealt with. But that suggests that Sansa would consider murdering her own sister for political reasons, and we have no reason to believe that Sansa is that Machiavellian. It would go against everything we know about her character. And also, the invitation didn’t come until after Littlefinger talked to her, so neither had any idea that they would have an opportunity to remove Brienne.
There’s also the little problem that Brienne is probably the only one in the castle who could possibly beat Arya, so if she’s gone, just how is Arya supposed to be killed or even imprisoned? Sansa and Littlefinger both saw Arya fight Brienne. Sansa knew that Arya easily slipped past her guards and entered Winterfell without a problem. Sansa also knows that Arya has yet-unseen skills or powers, and could easily kill Sansa or anyone else any time she wanted to. That’s pretty hard to square with the idea that she would send her main bodyguard away so that some other unnamed person could ‘deal’ with Arya.
As if to underscore the point, when Sansa is talking to Brienne, Brienne repeats, “Your Lady, I am sworn to protect both you AND your sister.” I don"t think anyone here is considering murdering Arya. Except maybe Littlefinger. But here’s a thought - what if Littlefinger arranged for the ‘invitation’, right after putting the notion in Sansa’s head that Brienne was going to be a problem if Arya had to be dealt with? That was awfully convenient timing, and it makes no sense for Sansa to be called to the meeting.
The scene with Arya and Sansa was interesting - and makes me think that the ‘Waif is Arya’ theory might still be alive. Arya’s speech started out by talking about a game she used to play in Braavos - the ‘game of faces’, where two people would tell true stories about their life, and the other person would have to guess if it was true or a lie. She then says, “the game of faces didn’t turn out so well for the last person who asked me questions.”
Now, that little exposition would underscore two possible things: One, that game could only have been played with the Waif. and as I recall it was Arya Stark who kept asking the Waif all kinds of questions about her past. It would also explain how the Waif could know so many details about Arya’s past. If they played that game for a long time, Arya would have had to tell an awful lot about herself.
To make it even more compelling, Arya also says that putting on a face allows you to not just look like someone, but to BE them. To know what it’s like to live in their skin. So perhaps if the Waif is wearing Arya’s face, killing the Freys and going to Winterfell was part of ‘living in her skin’.
I hope this is not the case, and it doesn’t explain everything - but that could easily be attributed to sloppy writing. If they want to have a big reveal of the Waif as Arya at some point, they’ve probably covered enough of their tracks that the rest could be fanwanked away. I still wouldn’t like it, and I think it would be kind of weak. But I think the door is still open to the possibility.
That would still require the waif to have cut off her own face…if they really go there then will the next episode include Henry Winkler, a dangerous fish in a pool, and some kind of wheeled vehicle?
I think we’ve seen from these threads that nothing in this show is truly consistent or makes any sense under scrutiny. Just roll with it and enjoy the ride.
There’s nothing at that link that says anything about twirling.
It’s been a long thread discussing this episode, but it seems we’ve overlooked the most important conversation:
Sandor Clegane “…so what’s your whinging about?”
Gendry “I’m not whinging”
Sandor “Your lips are moving, and you’re complaining about something. That’s whinging. This one’s been killed six times and you don’t hear him bitching about it.”
Gendry - accepts flask, drinks heavily.
In the first few seconds of the clip, a swordsman spins in a circle and is killed by Dayne justly. Twirling or spinning around flashily in visual media is one of those tropes that I like to see being avoided in settings that make otherwise an effort to look realistic - or if someone is doing dramatics, it should only work under circumstances that favour such displays, mostly: intimidation, incitement, distraction.
There are very few circumstances in a fight that justify spinning or twirling; if you wield a weapon that needs to be twirled around to be effective, well, you do that. And if your target is stationary or slow, the added force and speed to a strike could be an advantage.
But this unnamed swordsman had no reason whatsoever to twirl on his axis to get close to an expert fighter. He was stupid, and he paid for it.
As I said, the choreographer should not have decided to let the actor playing Arthur Dayne twirl around his swords while facing several opponents. It made him look pretentious, not professional.
On the other hand, the way Arthur Dayne died reiterated the over-confidence and lack of situational awareness that is foreshadowed in his fighting style.
Btw, Matt Easton has published his review of the Arya vs Brienne sparring fight, and while he seems to have the same issues with it that were already expressed here, he was pleased overall with the choreography.
You’re right, I’d forgotten how much of that conversation had to do with Mance’s assumption (probably correct) that resettled Wildlings would get enlisted. I take it back.
@MaxTheVool
But you were also right. Stannis’ offer was the best they could have hoped for under dire circumstances, Mance just could not take it. Tormund? Yes. But not Mance. He could no longer live for their dream, so he chose to die for it, and so keep it alive.
The lord of light is the nights king…
I am not sure this actually makes sense but it would explain somethings that go on in show. Stanis killing wildlings means fewer men to fight the nk, Stanis losing at winterfel takes out the one king who really did take the threat seriously, for that matter the battle at kingslanding killed men on all sides, and divided them all even further. Stanis had to go if the nk was going to have a chance of success. To get a dragon the nk had to have the son of Rehgar come north and get trapped thus needing a rescue. The last bit is weak we haven’t seen much in show to indicate that he has any ability to see things the way Bran does but he can see when Bran is watching so it’s not much of a stretch. I would have to really pay attention to all the other lord of light related bits of the show to work this hypothesis out.
We’re not the only ones to nitpick the velocities of Westerosi ravens and dragons (laden and unladen): http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/25/entertainment/game-of-thrones-nitpicking/index.html
I’m sure that this has been mentioned, but if they wanted an ice zombie to take to King’s Landing, couldn’t they just have made one? Take a prisoner north of the wall, chain him up, slit his throat and don’t burn the body. Wouldn’t he zombify? They could have done the whole thing before breakfast.
Consider who led this trip: the guy who managed to get stabbed by his sworn brothers. The guy who failed to convince the northern Houses to support the Starks against a sadistic lunatic. The guy who marched on Winterfell with an inadequate army after a seasoned commander had already done that and had been utterly destroyed.
The guy who didn’t give his ace in the deck, the one remaining giant, any armor (just a shield made out of planks would have worked miracles) or weapon to use his reach and strength in a properly devastating way.
The guy who forced his outnumbered army to either abandon their vital defensive positions or him, their leader, when he rode out into the battlefield all on his own before the fighting had even started.
What did you expect?