Septa Lemore is not Ashara Dayne

[Ygrain]

Second, ignoring GRRM's patterns in writing is absurd. That's kind of my point in the OT, and it has been already mentioned that he does works in three steps (or something like that). I can't remember another character right now, but he does that with Jon:

Book 3: Oh, yeah... there was this guy called Jon Connington, he wore griffins, was Hand and... he... died? who cares.

Book 4: Ah... this Connington guy. Yeah, I knew him. He was friend of Rhaegar, he was exiled and his cousin got everything. Also, his cousin has red hair.

Book 5: "Hi, I'm griff. I'm not a Lord and ignore my red hair, please".

Martin carefully put some details of Jon all over the place, and when we met this Griff guy, all of the details fit: red hair, living in Essos, educated, griffin theme. All of that helped to figure out that indeed, Griff was a former Lord from Westeros and House Connington.

THAT IS HOW HE WRITES.

How dare you propose that there is a pattern. That's merely your fabrication and I disagree.

No hint towards a character's brand feature, not even in any veiled way, no hint towards a shared past or future importance based on who she is. No mention of her legendary beauty when she was younger (and had she caught Rhaegar's eye instead of Lyanna, much woe would have been avoided), no mention of a tragic loss(es) which she had overcome. None of the Ashara-specific features at all

I'd almost say that those generic features which Lemore shares with Ashara (dark hair, Westerosi, possibly a Lady, had given birth) is GRRM trolling the readers by hinting at yet another not-quite-as-dead-as-everyone-thinks character.

BTW, if we have Ashara in medias res to give us access to information, why do we need to Starfall in the next book? Given the scope of the book, it is quite redundant as the second step of the reveal.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

I'd almost say that those generic features which Lemore shares with Ashara (dark hair, Westerosi, possibly a Lady, had given birth) is GRRM trolling the readers by hinting at yet another not-quite-as-dead-as-everyone-thinks character.

There is a chance, yep. This is also the book when it's mentioned that some fisherwoman is Jon's mother (something Stannis also mocks about). I think this is GRRM trolling us.

Davos hears about some fisherwoman being pregnant with Ned Stark's bastard.

Then, Stannis jokes about that.

FORESHADOWING!!!!

But... WAIT!!!

Barristan then reminds us of sweet Ashara Dayne, who was comforted by some Stark.

Ufff... back to normal, then! Ashara is the mother, not some fisherman from the Fingers, duh!

I think that's what GRRM want us to think in the book. Once again, Ashara being suggested as Jon's mother, and nothing to do with some Valyrian looking kid.

[Sanset]

I think patterns or no patterns the point is GRRM has the freedom to write whatever he wants the way he wants. He doesn't have to be a slave of patterns.
I guess we can agree that GRRM is a creative artist.
Creative artists don't restrict themselves to pattern they break the molds even those they had created. Actually if there is a pattern it's that GRRM likes to play with tropes and stereotypes. He tends to find the way to give them a twist. He recreates them.

Anyway, GRRM has showed multiple ways to display his riddles. The Lemorgate is constructed with all the pieces but not the main pieces, because all those little details make the game. There is no riddle if he writes "purple eyes" or "haunting eyes". If he is going to say that, he is writing Ashara's name. There is no mystery. But if he shows only the little pieces all together, he creates the blur to hide the secret.

I think the argument about patterns is the worst way to go because it attacks the author's freedom to display all his creativity. It is almost like trying to establish what the author can write and what he can't, and saying how he's supposed to write it or not to write it.

[Ygrain]

You misinterpret what a pattern in writing means. It stems from the author himself - a way through which his creativity is expressed, not an outside force that he blindly adheres to. It's an equivalent to the way a painter uses his brush, and an expert at painting is able to recognize an artist by the specifics of his work (I'm not such an expert but Vincent van Gogh would be an example that even an untrained person can recognize).

[JonCon's Red Beard]

I think patterns or no patterns the point is GRRM has the freedom to write whatever he wants the way he wants. He doesn't have to be a slave of patterns.

I guess we can agree that GRRM is a creative artist.

Creative artists don't restrict themselves to pattern they break the molds even those they had created. Actually if there is a pattern it's that GRRM likes to play with tropes and stereotypes. He tends to find the way to give them a twist. He recreates them.

Anyway, GRRM has showed multiple ways to display his riddles. The Lemorgate is constructed with all the pieces but not the main pieces, because all those little details make the game. There is no riddle if he writes "purple eyes" or "haunting eyes". If he is going to say that, he is writing Ashara's name. There is no mystery. But if he shows only the little pieces all together, he creates the blur to hide the secret.

I think the argument about patterns is the worst way to go because it attacks the author's freedom to display all his creativity. It is almost like trying to establish what the author can write and what he can't, and saying how he's supposed to write it or not to write it.

I would agree on this, but GRRM's editor herself has commented on GRRM using that way of writing.

..it is easier to tell when he’s overplaying a hand and revealing things too early if you don’t actually know going in what will happen. That said, now that I’ve realized his three-fold revelation strategy, I see it in play almost every time. The first, subtle hint for the really astute readers, followed later by the more blatant hint for the less attentive, followed by just spelling it out for everyone else. It’s a brilliant strategy, and highly effective.

This is HIS EDITOR, the woman who KNOWS HIS WORK better, saying it.

Here and here are examples, but I'll quote a few:

Subtle: “I dreamt of a roaring river and a woman that was a fish. Dead she drifted, with red tears on her cheeks, but when her eyes did open, oh, I woke from terror."

Blatant Hint: Nymeria finds a familiar body floating through the river and drags it to the shore. She runs away at the sound of the Brotherhood approaching.

Spelling it out: Someone named Lady Stoneheart is hanging Freys in the riverlands

Subtle: The House of the Undying.

Blatant: Roose's continious deliberate 'blunders', effectively showcasing his turning of the cloak.

Spelling it out: The Red Wedding

Subtle: Varys hints to Ned that a man who owed everything he was to Jon Arryn killed him. Ned thinks its Ser Hugh but Varys was subtly hinting at Littlefinger.

Blatant: Littlefinger gets sent by Tywin to bring Lysa Arryn and the Vale into the fold.

Spelling it out: Lysa confesses all to readers when she is talking to Littlefinger about how she poisoned Jon Arryn because he told her to.

Subtle: Septon Meribald's story of the Blackfyre sigil being cutdown/thrown out to sea then washing up red with rust years later. (AFFC)

Blatant: Quaithe's warning to Dany about the Mummer's Dragon. (ADWD)

Spelling it out: Aegon.

Need any more?

For Lemore being Ashara, we would be having the "blatant" already. We don't.

[Hippocras]

I think patterns or no patterns the point is GRRM has the freedom to write whatever he wants the way he wants. He doesn't have to be a slave of patterns.

I guess we can agree that GRRM is a creative artist.

Creative artists don't restrict themselves to pattern they break the molds even those they had created. Actually if there is a pattern it's that GRRM likes to play with tropes and stereotypes. He tends to find the way to give them a twist. He recreates them.

Anyway, GRRM has showed multiple ways to display his riddles. The Lemorgate is constructed with all the pieces but not the main pieces, because all those little details make the game. There is no riddle if he writes "purple eyes" or "haunting eyes". If he is going to say that, he is writing Ashara's name. There is no mystery. But if he shows only the little pieces all together, he creates the blur to hide the secret.

I think the argument about patterns is the worst way to go because it attacks the author's freedom to display all his creativity. It is almost like trying to establish what the author can write and what he can't, and saying how he's supposed to write it or not to write it.

Furthermore, arguments about patterns are selectively based on what any one reader notices, does not notice, or chooses to ignore.

As I already showed GRRM has at least one precedent (in fact many more but one was dircetly given on this thread) for withholding Tyrion's thoughts from the reader even in his own POV. So it is absolutely established that Tyrion's POV can not be assumed to be a running commentary on every single thought he has or observation he makes.

Yet people talking about his "pattern" here choose to ignore this established fact because it is inconvenient to their belief that GRRM would "definitely" have told us such and such detail if it were true.

[Ygrain]

Furthermore, arguments about patterns are selectively based on what any one reader notices, does not notice, or chooses to ignore.

As I already showed GRRM has at least one precedent (in fact many more but one was dircetly given on this thread) for withholding Tyrion's thoughts from the reader even in his own POV. So it is absolutely established that Tyrion's POV can not be assumed to be a running commentary on every single thought he has or observation he makes.

Yet people talking about his "pattern" here choose to ignore this established fact because it is inconvenient to their belief that GRRM would "definitely" have told us such and such detail if it were true.

Can you remind which precedent it was?

Also, FYI, there is this thing called literary analysis, which takes a close look at the way an author works.

[Jack Gardner]

JCRB,

While I think Lemore=Ashara rates as low in probability as R+L=/=J the part of the editor's statement immediately after the portion you bolded lends credence to at least one instance where there is a reveal not following the three stage pattern. I would find it interesting to figure out which one she thinks doesn't fit the pattern she has seen in his work.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

Also, FYI, there is this thing called literary analysis, which takes a close look at the way an author works.

Indeed. Literary analysis is based on finding patterns in the story. Patterns the author plants because the author controls everything, even the coincidences. They ARE NOT coincidences.

Another pattern of GRRM is the obviousness of the secret identities:

Abel -> Bael/Mance

Alleras -> Sarella

Arstan -> Barristan

Griff -> Jon of the Griffin's Roost.

Lord of the Waters -> Aurane Waters, son of the Lord of the Tides.

If Lemore was indeed Ashara, she would be called "Shara" or "Starsha" or anything related to her being part of House Dayne. It is not. Lemore, as much is an indication of "Le More", "there is more", as in "there is more about her than it meets to the eye", meaning, she's not just a septa, which is different from "she's actually someone else".

JCRB,

While I think Lemore=Ashara rates as low in probability as R+L=/=J the part of the editor's statement immediately after the portion you bolded lends credence to at least one instance where there is a reveal not following the three stage pattern. I would find it interesting to figure out which one she thinks doesn't fit the pattern she has seen in his work.

I think it would be RLJ, which hasn't yet been revealed in stages. But yeah, there must be a lot of other things not revealed in this way, but I am sure they'r ebarely important.

[Chebyshov]

If Lemore was indeed Ashara, she would be called "Shara" or "Starsha" or anything related to her being part of House Dayne. It is not. Lemore, as much is an indication of "Le More", "there is more", as in "there is more about her than it meets to the eye", meaning, she's not just a septa, which is different from "she's actually someone else".

I kiss that Lemore...aa!

"I'm like totes Ashara."

Queue Tom-Riddle style reveal.

[bent branch]

Here is the three part reveal for Ashara Dayne:

1) Ashara may not be quite as dead as thought (ASOS-Chapter 43):

"My father was Ser Arthur's elder brother. Lady Ashara was my aunt. I never knew her, though. She threw herself into the sea from atop the Palestone Sword before I was born."

So it is implied her body was never found.

2) Ashara didn't/doesn't have the same blond hair as her brother or nephew (ADWD-Chapter 67):

Rhaegar had chosen Lyanna Stark of Winterfell. Barristan Selmy would have made a different choice. Not the queen, who was not present. Nor Elia of Dorne, though she was good and gentle; had she been chosen, much war and woe might have been avoided. His choice would have been a young maiden not long at court, one of Elia's companions...though...compared to Ashara Dayne, the Dornish princess was a kitchen drab.

Even after all these years, Ser Barristan could still recall Ashara's smile, the sound of her laughter. He had only to close his eyes to see her, with her long dark hair tumbling about her shoulders and those haunting purple eyes.

So, from this we can see that Ashara was a vivacious, dark haired woman. Having recently met a vivacious, mysterious, dark-haired woman who had given birth, I would guess that Septa Lemore is Ashara Dayne.

3) The reveal, which has yet to happen.

I understand the arguments from those who think that GRRM would have mentioned the eyes if it was Ashara, however I think GRRM wouldn't have mentioned the eyes if he didn't want to reveal Ashara yet. Once the eyes are mentioned the reader will KNOW if she is Ashara. I think everyone has looked at the information available and weighed it in the manner they think best and have drawn their conclusion. Now all we can do is wait. Everyone is doing their version of literary analysis. Once the truth is revealed, we will find out whose methods are most effective.

[Sanset]

Furthermore, arguments about patterns are selectively based on what any one reader notices, does not notice, or chooses to ignore.

As I already showed GRRM has at least one precedent (in fact many more but one was dircetly given on this thread) for withholding Tyrion's thoughts from the reader even in his own POV. So it is absolutely established that Tyrion's POV can not be assumed to be a running commentary on every single thought he has or observation he makes.

Yet people talking about his "pattern" here choose to ignore this established fact because it is inconvenient to their belief that GRRM would "definitely" have told us such and such detail if it were true.

I agree.

The story about the Last Hero is another example that GRRM several times leaves crucial info off the screen. Actually he has said that there are no chapters with Varys or Petyr PoV because they know too much. So, not saying everything (even significant details) is a pattern he uses. GRRM likes his riddles. He gives the info in the time he considers it's the right time. That is the game from the very beginning. He also writes things that seem to be just side stories but then he uses those things at some point of the main story.

Indeed. Literary analysis is based on finding patterns in the story. Patterns the author plants because the author controls everything, even the coincidences. They ARE NOT coincidences.

(...)

If Lemore was indeed Ashara, she would be called "Shara" or "Starsha" or anything related to her being part of House Dayne. It is not. Lemore, as much is an indication of "Le More", "there is more", as in "there is more about her than it meets to the eye", meaning, she's not just a septa, which is different from "she's actually someone else".

That's going a little too far. Authors are people, they don't control 'everything'. If authors are also good artist they have the talent to let some things flow. Art is about freedom not about control. Some degree of control is required but not to the point of 'everything'. Anyway, I agree, the major things are not real coincidences.

Maybe Lemore is not only Hitchcock/Novak clue.

It can also be: "there is more than meets the eye".

As it was pointed out, in Tyrion's own chapter of ADwD we couldn't read the consequences of the cyvasse game that Tyrion won. We just read that some turtles were crawling out Haldon's arse. But that only indicated that Haldon lost the game, we didn't see what secrets Haldon had to pay. I'm sure Tyrion was not going to ask Haldon's favorite color.

GRRM uses cliffhangers a lot, that is leaving things out of the scene (like word or sword). Thankfully, when I read AGoT I've already had ACoK, which I thought I was not going to read right away, BUT! GRRM left Arya in the middle of King's Landing alone after watching her father die. I still have the trauma. I had to jump to the next Arya's chapter. He left us hanging with Tyrion a little bit at the end of ASoS, but he published Tyrion ADwD first chapter on-line. There are so many cases that shows how GRRM keeps info out of the screen that it's like a never-ending job to point out all of them.

He didn't said it was Lyanna's name when Rhaegar died, or that it was Elia and true baby Aegon in THotU. He said those things in interviews, but it is not in the text explicitly. So if some readers don't go on line they could still be wondering because it was not confirmed to them.

PS: I'm leaving Syrio out of the list. ;)

Just to avoid the usual messy arguments.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

Here is the three part reveal for Ashara Dayne:

1) Ashara may not be quite as dead as thought (ASOS-Chapter 43):

So it is implied her body was never found.

First, you're trying to fit this naming of Ashara into a further revelation of her being Lemore. It's not. This clues are meant to lead to other path: to be Jon's mother, although this is a misleading. All of Ashara's mentions in the books are meant to mislead us into believing she's Jon's mother.

That quote you provided is implying something: Ashara did kill herself out of grief. THAT IS the mystery. What she was grieving about? That Brandon died? That Ned was married? That her baby died? Arthur being murdered? And, that clue is introduced earlier in aGoT, when Cersei talks about that and teases Ned.

Clue #1: Ashara Dayne killed herself after Ned went to Dorne.

Is in Storm when we know more about her story: she was a hottie back then, and apparently, desired by few guys (they threw some big names there, including, a Prince of Dorne). Not only Meera says this, but also does Halden and Edric: she died of grief, and this grief is very likely due to be have lost a lover, a Stark.

Clue #2: She did knew Ned Stark, and also Brandon.

Remember that RLJ hasn't been revealed, at least not officially. These are clues to makes us doubt: Edric mentions Wylla being Jon's mother, and later, also does Ashara. we're supposed to think: "not, that kid has it wrong. Ashara is the real mother, that's why she killed herself".

And, finally, in Dance, Barristan implies Ashara "chose" a Stark. Once more, Ashara is linked to a Stark. Clue #3.

2) Ashara didn't/doesn't have the same blond hair as her brother or nephew (ADWD-Chapter 67):

So, from this we can see that Ashara was a vivacious, dark haired woman. Having recently met a vivacious, mysterious, dark-haired woman who had given birth, I would guess that Septa Lemore is Ashara Dayne.

Where is it mentioned she was vivacious? If anything, she danced with those men out of courtesy. The fact that she laughed meant nothing either: Barristan could have caught a glimpse of that while she was privately laughing with friends.

And, I think it's not stated what was the colour of Arthur's hair.

Nevertheless, "dark-haired" isn't always the same as brown. Dark hair could be black. Why not saying brown hair instead?

3) The reveal, which has yet to happen.

The reveal will be the identity of her lover, and why they didn't marry. Also, the reveal will tell us that she is NOT Jon's mother, as many have assumed in Westeros. I would even say that the big reveal is that she killed herself because she was involved in the Rebellion, being part of the conspiracy and sending messages to ToJ, hence, in a way, she was involved in the chain of actions that killed her brother.

That's going a little too far. Authors are people, they don't control 'everything'. If authors are also good artist they have the talent to let some things flow. Art is about freedom not about control. Some degree of control is required but not to the point of 'everything'. Anyway, I agree, the major things are not real coincidences.

Yes, they do. They control everything in their work. As you said, two people don't meet coincidently because of simply coincidence. Of course, not. Those two people meet because the author wants it to happen: he creates the coincidence. The author controls what the characters feel, say and think. That's how authors communicate with us, through them, even if the characters don't know what they are communicating. If Martin had wanted us to know that Lemore is Ashara, he could have made him quite explicit (Martin is more obvious than people credits him for), and Tyrion could have commented on the eyes. Or Jon, as Aegon's eyes remind him of Rhaegar's, even if they are different. And even if none of them had related Lemore with Ashara, we do. That's how you create hints.

But he didn't. He has, whatsoever, let us know that Lemore is not just some septa.

As it was pointed out, in Tyrion's own chapter of ADwD we couldn't read the consequences of the cyvasse game that Tyrion won. We just read that some turtles were crawling out Haldon's arse. But that only indicated that Haldon lost the game, we didn't see what secrets Haldon had to pay. I'm sure Tyrion was not going to ask Haldon's favorite color.

But it was immediately, revealed what the secret ares. In the very same chapter, IICR. And even if we don't know what he was told, we do know he was told something very important, he mentions it when he says, after seeing the turtles, that "[G]ods and wonders always appear, to attend the birth of kings". That is, again, the three stages reveal, even if Tyrion himself does not know yet:

1. YG's eyes look purple ("By lamplight they turned black, and in the light of

dusk they seemed purple").

2. Tyrion talks about kings.

We, as readers, are already being informed that YG is related to House Targaryen.

3. YG is Aegon, Rhaegar's son.

The first clue isn't for Tyrion. It's for us. We're meant to see the eyes as suspicious. By the time Tyrion mentions the "Kings", we're meant to find out.

And, once again, the eyes are important here. Eyes are quite a given not only in ASOIAF but in literature in general. And in ASOIAF, they determinate genetics and family. It happened with the Baratheos: black hair and blue eyes. Or how all of the Sand Snakes have his father's eyes, even if not the same colour. That's how people found out about Alleras being Sarella: Martin didn't say it, WE FOUND OUT. Martin ONLY needed to say "oh, Lemore's eyes look like this boy's" for us to find out she's Ashara. Tyrion could have thought she was some woman from Mhyr.

[Mithras]

And, I think it's not stated what was the colour of Arthur's hair.

Nevertheless, "dark-haired" isn't always the same as brown. Dark hair could be black. Why not saying brown hair instead?

Arthur's hair was silver. But I agree that dark means black in Ashara's case. Gerold has silver hair with a midnight black streak.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

Another against point is Ashara age. Ashara if she was alive she would be in her mid thirties and Lemore is mid-late forties.

[Mithras]

Another against point is Ashara age. Ashara if she was alive she would be in her mid thirties and Lemore is mid-late forties.

Yes. George actually confirmed in an SSM that Howland and Ashara are around the same age.

6) How old is Howland Reed?

He'd be in his thirties.

7) And how would have been Ashara Dayne?

Ditto.

X

[Chebyshov]

Every point is a point against, lol. The only point "for" is that Lemore laughs and has dark hair. And I mean, wow. Who can argue with that logic.

I'm not saying that it's a certainty Ashara is dead (though IMO the lack of a body probably because no one was fool enough to go splashing around in Dorne's southern shore), or that the Daynes won't have an important part to play. But trying to make Lemore fit as Ashara is not the way to go about it.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

Yes. George actually confirmed in an SSM that Howland and Ashara are around the same age.

6) How old is Howland Reed?

He'd be in his thirties.

7) And how would have been Ashara Dayne?

Ditto.

X

However we all know how Tyrion knows nothing about women and he could easily mistaken a 35 year old for a 45 year old.

Every point is a point against, lol. The only point "for" is that Lemore laughs and has dark hair. And I mean, wow. Who can argue with that logic.

Don't forget the stretch marks! Only Ash was ever pregnant in Westerosi history.

[Mithras]

Tyrion: ... On the boat, there was this septa who liked to bath naked in the morning sun. A brown haired woman in her forties with nice teats. I noted her stretchmarks from a previous birth as well.

Ser Barristan: Ash... Ashara. [dies to sudden heart attack]

[Hippocras]

Lemore's age is not precisely given and nor is Howland's. Howland was a young man at Harrenhal, and we can guess his age to be somewhat similar to Ned's but really we are just guessing if we put a precise number on it. So I don't see how age can be taken as any more of a definitive proof of anything than the eyes can. It is unknown.

All we know of Ashara is that she was Elia's confidante and not long at court. Elia would now be 44 and was 24 at Harrenhal. Ashara may have been younger but not by much if they were close. She may, in fact have been older also: It would be very unlikely for a queen to have a trusted confidante who was practically a child. "Not long at court" means no more than it says: she was not in KL for very long. It says nothing about her age. Nor does the word "maiden" because that just means she was unmarried and presumed to be a virgin.

Or are people just assuming that Ned would never dance with an older woman or something? Or alternatively are people assuming that she would have been married by her mid-twenties so can't possibly have been that old? The first assumption is nothing but sexism, and the second is proven untrue by Arianne.