What if R+L=J is not true? Will you be disappointed?

[J. Stargaryen]

How would it be a lie if it was someone other than you expect as long as the answer fits? We haven't even had the case laid out completely yet.

All you do by saying it would be a lie is limit yourself from seeing anything else.

It would be a lie by GRRM's own definition because all of the clues point to R+L=J. If it was something else, we'd have clues pointing to that. But we don't.

As for the second part, that's not true. It's not that I'm limiting myself from seeing, it's that I've looked, and looked. No other option works. They all fall apart some place, or often in multiple places.

It's not just me either. Lots and lots of very smart people have spent lots and lots of time looking at these books. They all keep coming to the same conclusion.

[sj4iy]

As for the second part, that's not true. It's not that I'm limiting myself from seeing, it's that I've looked, and looked. No other option works. They all fall apart some place, or often in multiple places.

It's not just me either. Lots and lots of very smart people have spent lots and lots of time looking at these books. They all keep coming to the same conclusion.

------------

Agreed. This theory is the only one that can encompass all of the clues, hints, prophecies, visions and dreams and not fall apart. It's simply the most logical solution we have at this point.

[nedhed]

What if R+L=(f)aegon, and N+A=Jon? It's Jon's destiny to become the sword of the morning and he will lead the battle for the dawn while allowing his cousin to take hsi rightful claim to the throne? This was all worked out between Ned and Ashara during their time at Starfall- maybe R+L's kid had the true targ featres so Ned promised Lyanna that he would work out a way to keep him in hiding- And Ashara went on to be Septa Lemore to foster (f)aegon and eventually teach Jon the truth, perhas with evidence from the crypts? Would that fit all the prophecies and whatnot?

[sj4iy]

What if R+L=(f)aegon, and N+A=Jon? It's Jon's destiny to become the sword of the morning and he will lead the battle for the dawn while allowing his cousin to take hsi rightful claim to the throne? This was all worked out between Ned and Ashara during their time at Starfall- maybe R+L's kid had the true targ featres so Ned promised Lyanna that he would work out a way to keep him in hiding- And Ashara went on to be Septa Lemore to foster (f)aegon and eventually teach Jon the truth, perhas with evidence from the crypts? Would that fit all the prophecies and whatnot?

What about the blue rose on the chunk of ice in Dany's vision? What meaning could that have other than "Lyanna's son at the Wall"?

[nedhed]

What about the blue rose on the chunk of ice in Dany's vision? What meaning could that have other than "Lyanna's son at the Wall"?

That (f)aegon, Lyanna's son, must go to the wall to meet up with Jon, Lyanna's nephew, to prepare for the war for the dawn?

[sj4iy]

That (f)aegon, Lyanna's son, must go to the wall to meet up with Jon, Lyanna's nephew, to prepare for the war for the dawn?

...so, ignore the obvious connotation of it all and make an assumption that the other guy may eventually go to the Wall and fight? In any case, I don't know why Ned would lie or hide Jon's identity if his mother were AD to protect a different child and then let his beloved sister's only child go off to god knows where to be raised by who knows.

[Firiel Hiren]

It would be a lie by GRRM's own definition because all of the clues point to R+L=J. If it was something else, we'd have clues pointing to that. But we don't.

As for the second part, that's not true. It's not that I'm limiting myself from seeing, it's that I've looked, and looked. No other option works. They all fall apart some place, or often in multiple places.

It's not just me either. Lots and lots of very smart people have spent lots and lots of time looking at these books. They all keep coming to the same conclusion.

Just because you can't see another way doesn't mean there isn't one. You want to believe there is only one way so that is how you choose to see both the author's quote and any potential clues to anything else.

Making blanket statements like "all of the clues" and "lots of other very smart people" just show how you have limited yourself not how open minded you are.

There are still two books (at least) remaining. I am hoping for some surprises with regard to Lyanna and a few other characters as well.

[Freefolk4life]

Just because you can't see another way doesn't mean there isn't one. You want to believe there is only one way so that is how you choose to see both the author's quote and any potential clues to anything else.

Making blanket statements like "all of the clues" and "lots of other very smart people" just show how you have limited yourself not how open minded you are.

There are still two books (at least) remaining. I am hoping for some surprises with regard to Lyanna and a few other characters as well.

There are still two books, but it was meant as a trilogy...I would think GRRM would have some clues in the first book.. one's that seem very obvious now, but maybe not so much on the first read.

[nedhed]

...so, ignore the obvious connotation of it all and make an assumption that the other guy may eventually go to the Wall and fight? In any case, I don't know why Ned would lie or hide Jon's identity if his mother were AD to protect a different child and then let his beloved sister's only child go off to god knows where to be raised by who knows.

Here's what I see in my crackpot fires: Ned and Ashara were in love; the Daynes were extremely loyal to Rhaegar; Ned was extremely loyal to Lyanna; Lyanna's nephew via Ned and Ashara would be of her blood and potentially house dayne's sword of the morning; Ned shipped his nephew off with Ashara because he had targ features, Ashara took the hit because her bro arthur loved rhaegar and she loved Ned, Ned lied about Jon being a Stark/Dayne because he didn't want to tell Jon that his mother was off protecting his cousin, which would have revealed who Lyanna's child was, the very child Lyanna promised him to protect. But Jon, as a dayne and sword of the mornign and blood of Lyanna is symbolically represented at the wall with the blue rose and it is prophetic that (f)aegon and his cousin will meet to save the westerosi from Dany's dragonbreath and the icyfreeze of the others. it is known.

[sj4iy]

Just because you can't see another way doesn't mean there isn't one. You want to believe there is only one way so that is how you choose to see both the author's quote and any potential clues to anything else.

Making blanket statements like "all of the clues" and "lots of other very smart people" just show how you have limited yourself not how open minded you are.

There are still two books (at least) remaining. I am hoping for some surprises with regard to Lyanna and a few other characters as well.

I don't think it's about not being open-minded...it's about logic. What's the logical conclusion to draw from everything we have so far? Yes, of course, something else could come along and change everything, but that's just it- until we get that other information, we can't logically draw any other conclusion right now. It's sort of like prosecuting a case...if you have the gun, the car and all of the supplies used in a murder, and all of them are owned by the same person, then you would logically draw the conclusion that that person is the murderer. However, there's always a chance that a witness could come along in the future with new information that indicates someone else, but you can't make a case against someone else on the basis that a witness with new information MIGHT exist- you make your case on what you've got.

All of the clues DO lead to R+L=J, but I wouldn't say that people were smart or dumb based on what they think about a theory from a series of books. People just don't read everything the same way. What's less clear is Jon's legitimacy, which could go either way at this point since we have so little information other than the ToJ dream.

[avernite]

I do not know if I will be disappointed.

There are many clues that point to R+L=J, just as there were many clues that the Lannisters poisoned Jon Arryn (Lysa said it, Ned seemed to provide a motive, they DID poison Robert, and they tried to kill Bran). In the end, it was resolved in a way that still fit nearly everything (I just don't quite get how Ned find a motive so quick, but I may have misread some of LF's reasoning for pushing Lysa to kill Jon) so I was not disappointed.

Likewise, I see plenty of potential for L+R=J to be untrue. Primarily because I don't see how it would matter much, with Jon in the NW and (nearly) noone around to inform him of the truth, but also because all the evidence is circumstancial rather than direct. IF R+L=/=J, you have to explain what Ned did promise his sister, and it'd be nice if the King's guard were not at the ToJ for a lousy reason, but all the rest seems like it can have mundane explanations other than R+L=J. But if GRRM can explain the first and ignores the second I wouldn't be disappointed.

[JNR]

Just because you can't see another way doesn't mean there isn't one. You want to believe there is only one way so that is how you choose to see both the author's quote and any potential clues to anything else.

Making blanket statements like "all of the clues" and "lots of other very smart people" just show how you have limited yourself not how open minded you are.

:agree:

It's always interesting when relative newbies with only a few hundred posts run logical rings around the more established posters, in those posters' own area of interest and expertise.

For instance, it's just not reasonable to talk about "all the clues" when there is no algorithm for determining what a clue even is.

There are five books and three novellas comprising something on the order of a million words. It's a tremendous body of information... and the information is not tidily divided into Clues and Not Clues. It's just information.

For instance, Robert's remark that in the north, kings are hiding under snow... is that a clue? You can call it one if you like. But there's certainly no reference to Jon.

Indeed, what R+L=J supporters often do is begin with their favorite premise and then look for clues to support it. This is, needless to say, backwards -- the opposite of what we as readers should be doing and the opposite of the way science is supposed to work.

Furthermore, we have no algorithm for determing which direction clues "point," either. It's information and it can be interpreted in various ways.

For instance, if we assume Robert's remark is a clue, and we're supposed to be looking under snow for kings... does that mean Satin (who is below Jon in the Watch hierarchy) will one day be king? Does it mean Jon's horse will be king? Does it mean Ygritte already was king (at least, in certain positions)?

The statement that "all the clues point to R+L=J" simply makes no sense.

[sj4iy]

:agree:

It's always interesting when relative newbies with only a few hundred posts run logical rings around the more established posters, in those posters' own area of interest and expertise.

For instance, it's just not reasonable to talk about "all the clues" when there is no algorithm for determining what a clue even is.

There are five books and three novellas comprising something on the order of a million words. It's a tremendous body of information... and the information is not tidily divided into Clues and Not Clues. It's just information.

For instance, Robert's remark that in the north, kings are hiding under snow... is that a clue? You can call it one if you like. But there's certainly no reference to Jon.

Indeed, what R+L=J supporters often do is begin with their favorite premise and then look for clues to support it. This is, needless to say, backwards -- the opposite of what we as readers should be doing and the opposite of the way science is supposed to work.

Furthermore, we have no algorithm for determing which direction clues "point," either. It's information and it can be interpreted in various ways.

For instance, if we assume Robert's remark is a clue, and we're supposed to be looking under snow for kings... does that mean Satin (who is below Jon in the Watch hierarchy) will one day be king? Does it mean Jon's horse will be king? Does it mean Ygritte already was king (at least, in certain positions)?

The statement that "all the clues point to R+L=J" simply makes no sense.

Clues are any pieces of information that allow you to work out a mystery. There doesn't have to be an 'algorithm' for determining what clues mean in literature, they can be obvious or obscure- but that doesn't mean they aren't clues. Now, I think the 'king' talk is interesting, but I don't subscribe to the theory that they were put there on purpose...they just read to me like normal conversation without any hidden meaning. But there are indeed actual clues:

The Tower of Joy dream (this is inarguably the biggest clue we have)

Dany's vision of the blue rose in the ice

Lyanna's favorite flower being blue roses

Lyanna's deathbed smelling of "blood and roses"

Jon's looks being the same as Arya's, and therefore, Lyanna's

Ned's refusal to talk about Jon's mother to anyone

Ned's upstanding honor

Ned telling Jon "You have my blood"

The timing of Lyanna's death and Jon's birth

Rhaegar and Lyanna's obvious attraction towards each other at the tournament

Rhagear's obsession with fulfilling the prophecies of "The Prince Who was Promised"

Rhaegar telling Elia that Aegon is the song of "Fire and Ice" and that the dragon needs "Three Heads"

Elia being unable to have a third child

Rhaegar saying 'a woman's name' as he died

THOSE are undeniable clues, although the prophecies can sometimes confuse or lead astray. But we have very, very little evidence that either Wylla or Ashara Dayne is Jon's true mother. For me, though, it's not about if who his mother is...I just want to see what happens to Jon and what he will become (hopefully, not a corpse). I only care about his past because it seems to have a direct effect on the entire story.

[Firiel Hiren]

I don't think it's about not being open-minded...it's about logic. What's the logical conclusion to draw from everything we have so far? Yes, of course, something else could come along and change everything, but that's just it- until we get that other information, we can't logically draw any other conclusion right now.

The thread is about the end of the series and how people would feel about it.

If you are concluding now you are not open minded.

It's sort of like prosecuting a case...if you have the gun, the car and all of the supplies used in a murder, and all of them are owned by the same person, then you would logically draw the conclusion that that person is the murderer.

Are you really comparing this partially written story to a murder case?

Are you telling me you would convict someone of murder based on a the "evidence" submitted?

You might want to wait for more evidence and to hear witness testimony before heading to trial... or hanging anyone.

We have no evidence that even remotely comes close to a gun, car with title or supplies used in a murder.

However, there's always a chance that a witness could come along in the future with new information that indicates someone else, but you can't make a case against someone else on the basis that a witness with new information MIGHT exist- you make your case on what you've got.

No.. you wait until you have enough evidence to convict or prove a case?

It is interesting that you compare this to a court case but I am guessing if you brought the blue flower and the timing before a judge the case would be thrown out immediately and you might get jail time for wasting the court's time.

All of the clues

You haven't listed to what you mean by "all the clues".

It is a blanket statement that makes it seem like you have "GRRM's secret list of all the clues".

We do not know what the clues are at this point because we have an incomplete storyline.

We have foreshadowing - reoccuring item in the story and some unexplained absences.

Foreshadowing can be used for misdirection and I interpret the foreshadowing we have seen so far to be misdirection because I think it is conspicuously obvious. That is my opinion.

People just don't read everything the same way.

Agreed! I also think the author is well aware of that fact.

What's less clear is Jon's legitimacy, which could go either way at this point since we have so little information other than the ToJ dream.

Agreed! :)

[Firiel Hiren]

There are still two books, but it was meant as a trilogy...I would think GRRM would have some clues in the first book.. one's that seem very obvious now, but maybe not so much on the first read.

Now, it is no longer a trilogy. What it was meant to be is irrelevant.

I agree the seeds for the ending should be in the whole story from the beginning and I bet they are.

I simply think it is too early when there are at least two more books to conclude the ending.

[J. Stargaryen]

Just because you can't see another way doesn't mean there isn't one. You want to believe there is only one way so that is how you choose to see both the author's quote and any potential clues to anything else.

Making blanket statements like "all of the clues" and "lots of other very smart people" just show how you have limited yourself not how open minded you are.

There are still two books (at least) remaining. I am hoping for some surprises with regard to Lyanna and a few other characters as well.

The 'you're being close minded' argument is a common defense mechanism amongst the R+L=/=J crowd. Since they can't really attack R+L=J, they attack R+L=Jers. But there's an inherent flaw there. You could be right and it doesn't change anything about the books. I could be the most biased, biggest hidden heir trope fan in the world, and nothing about the books changes.

:agree:

It's always interesting when relative newbies with only a few hundred posts run logical rings around the more established posters, in those posters' own area of interest and expertise.

For instance, it's just not reasonable to talk about "all the clues" when there is no algorithm for determining what a clue even is.

There are five books and three novellas comprising something on the order of a million words. It's a tremendous body of information... and the information is not tidily divided into Clues and Not Clues. It's just information.

For instance, Robert's remark that in the north, kings are hiding under snow... is that a clue? You can call it one if you like. But there's certainly no reference to Jon.

Indeed, what R+L=J supporters often do is begin with their favorite premise and then look for clues to support it. This is, needless to say, backwards -- the opposite of what we as readers should be doing and the opposite of the way science is supposed to work.

Furthermore, we have no algorithm for determing which direction clues "point," either. It's information and it can be interpreted in various ways.

For instance, if we assume Robert's remark is a clue, and we're supposed to be looking under snow for kings... does that mean Satin (who is below Jon in the Watch hierarchy) will one day be king? Does it mean Jon's horse will be king? Does it mean Ygritte already was king (at least, in certain positions)?

The statement that "all the clues point to R+L=J" simply makes no sense.

JNR, if you have something to say to me, you really ought to address me. That's the grown up way to handle things.

You try to pass yourself off as this paragon of rationality and reasoning. But you're really not, are you? Because if you were, you wouldn't have made such a poorly reasoned argument here.

As per the article I quoted and linked up thread, GRRM seems to think that readers possess this clue identifying algorithm. His editor, who figured out Jon's parentage from the AGoT manuscript, apparently also possesses this clue identifying algorithm. Further, from that interview we can infer that GRRM has intentionally placed clues he means for us to identify in his books.

So, when you claim that my statement "all the clues point to R+L=J" doesn't make any sense, or isn't reasonable, all you're really telling us is that you've failed to understand how or why this concept functions, or that you don't possess the clue identifying algorithm yourself.

And of course, another big flaw in your argument is that you claim to have formed a handful of theories yourself. (Actually, it's more than that. You apparently claim to know things. Secret things.) Well, how were you able to figure this stuff out without identifying some clues? Maybe your reply will have something to do with 'interpreting information' but that's just semantics.

---

Also, to what I already stated above, I endorse sj4iy's post.

[sj4iy]

The thread is about the end of the series and how people would feel about it.

If you are concluding now you are not open minded.

Are you really comparing this partially written story to a murder case?

Are you telling me you would convict someone of murder based on a the "evidence" submitted?

You might want to wait for more evidence and to hear witness testimony before heading to trial... or hanging anyone.

We have no evidence that even remotely comes close to a gun, car with title or supplies used in a murder.

No.. you wait until you have enough evidence to convict or prove a case?

It is interesting that you compare this to a court case but I am guessing if you brought the blue flower and the timing before a judge the case would be thrown out immediately and you might get jail time for wasting the court's time.

You haven't listed to what you mean by "all the clues".

It is a blanket statement that makes it seem like you have "GRRM's secret list of all the clues".

We do not know what the clues are at this point because we have an incomplete storyline.

We have foreshadowing - reoccuring item in the story and some unexplained absences.

Foreshadowing can be used for misdirection and I interpret the foreshadowing we have seen so far to be misdirection because I think it is conspicuously obvious. That is my opinion.

Agreed! I also think the author is well aware of that fact.

Agreed! :)

I did qualify my post by saying that it is the most logical explanation we have with the information we have so far. I wasn't comparing it to a murder case, I was using it as a metaphor to say that you make the case with the information you have instead of saying "what if?" and making a case on information that you aren't sure will ever come. Like the (f)aegon theory- he may go to the Wall eventually and turn out to be the blue rose in the ice...but you can't build a convincing case on a 'what if' while ignoring the actual evidence that Jon is at the Wall and irrefutably has Stark blood in him. I'm not at all against other theories...but if they aren't supported properly by the text, then it's not a plausible theory. R+L=J is the most plausible theory there is right now. W+N=J is decisively less so, as is A+N=J. I love reading the different theories and I'm in no way closed-minded about them...I just need to see something that's at least as plausible as R+L=J before I will change my mind, and I'm sure others feel the same way.

[Firiel Hiren]

The 'you're being close-minded' argument is a common defense mechanism amongst the R+L=/=J crowd. Since they can't really attack R+L=J, they attack R+L=Jers. But there's an inherent flaw there. You could be right and it doesn't change anything about the books. I could be the most biased, biggest hidden heir trope fan in the world, and nothing about the books changes.

(Except the author isn't finished with his story! )

1) I am not "attacking" anyone, but that is an interesting word choice.

2) It is an even greater sign of how close-minded you are if it has actually been pointed out to you repeatedly and still you refuse to consider it. The fact that you only see it as "an attack" is a defense mechanism.

3) Labeling people like "R+L=/=Jers" does not make each individual person's opinion of less value.

4) I do not need to defend myself when stating my opinion. What am I defending myself from? You seem to enjoy making statements like "a lot of smart people" agree with you. I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. Why would I care or believe what you say? Is it supposed to change my opinion? Is it supposed to be peer pressure?

5) Including phrases like "since they can't really attack R+L=J" doesn't make the phrase true.

6) You are entitled to believe whatever you like, please allow others the same freedom.

This thread is an opinion thread about if the outcome isn't R+L=J.

Are we not allowed to have our own opinion without it threatening you so personally?

Maybe you just jump over to this thread looking for people who don't agree with you so you can lambast them with your views...

You should try thinking about what it actually means to have reached a conclusion AND be so emotionally invested in a theory in an incomplete work of fiction. At the very least it is close minded to have finished the series for yourself before it is truly over.

This is NOT the R+L=J thread.

[J. Stargaryen]

(Except the author isn't finished with his story! )

1) I am not "attacking" anyone, but that is an interesting word choice.

2) It is an even greater sign of how close-minded you are if it has actually been pointed out to you repeatedly and still you refuse to consider it. The fact that you only see it as "an attack" is a defense mechanism.

3) Labeling people like "R+L=/=Jers" does not make each individual person's opinion of less value.

4) I do not need to defend myself when stating my opinion. What am I defending myself from? You seem to enjoy making statements like "a lot of smart people" agree with you. I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. Why would I care or believe what you say? Is it supposed to change my opinion? Is it supposed to be peer pressure?

5) Including phrases like "since they can't really attack R+L=J" doesn't make the phrase true.

6) You are entitled to believe whatever you like, please allow others the same freedom.

This thread is an opinion thread about if the outcome isn't R+L=J.

Are we not allowed to have our own opinion without it threatening you so personally?

Maybe you just jump over to this thread looking for people who don't agree with you so you can lambast them with your views...

You should try thinking about what it actually means to have reached a conclusion AND be so emotionally invested in a theory in an incomplete work of fiction. At the very least it is close minded to have finished the series for yourself before it is truly over.

This is NOT the R+L=J thread.

1) I didn't mean "attacking" as a negative. Rather, arguing against or disagreeing with something.

2) You calling me close minded repeatedly doesn't mean I'm close minded, or that I haven't considered non-RLJ options for Jon's parentage. Nor was I referring to conversations with me exclusively. I don't think open or close minded means exactly what you think they do in this context. Having reached a conclusion for Jon's parentage doesn't mean one is close minded. I'm certainly open to considering new information. It's just that, considering all of the information I am currently aware of, I can't help but reach a certain conclusion.

3) Okay.

4) It's not that "a lot of smart people" agree with me. It's that a lot of smart people have come to the same conclusion. I think it's worth considering why that is.

5) Okay, except in many cases it is. Like what you're doing with me. You haven't poked any holes in R+L=J. You've just repeatedly tried to claim that I am, or we are, close minded.

6) I never said otherwise. This is just a straw man.

I don't know why you feel the need to personalize an otherwise polite disagreement, by claiming things like I'm close minded, threatened by other people's opinions, or emotionally invested in a theory. Based on our limited interactions, I'm capable of making unflattering statements about you too, but I don't do that.

[Britisher]

I will be over the moon! It's not true. Ashara is the mama face facts.

I know you all like to think that you've out smarted GRRM but he intentionally leads us down the path of thinking that Rhaegar and Lyanna are Jon's parents.