R+L=J v 150

[Bael's Bastard]

Arthur=daddy has nothing going for it. But by all means, feel free to lay out your best case in its own thread and put it to the test, as R+L=J has done, and as, much as I disagree with it, A+J=T has done. Cluttering this thread up with claims of viable alternative options without ever providing any substance just amounts to, well, I wouldn't want to get another warning, but I'm sure you can deduce what I mean.

[UnViserion]

Hello,

 

I pulled this out of the "Would Rhaegar and Jon Snow been buddies" thread. Just wondering if this guy nailed it or not:

 

 

For starters, I think Rhaegar kidnapped and impregnated Lyanna against her will. So that is going to color my answer to this question. If you disagree with this starting fact, then you would probably be better off skipping the rest of what I am about to say.

I think Rhaegar would not have been a good father. He strikes me as someone who sees his family as a means to an end. It was clear he was using Lyanna as a breeding cow for his outlandish prophecies, and he was more than willing to piss on his marriage to Elia in front of the whole kingdom and to abandon her and her children. I think Rhaegar would be either a distant and disinterested father (at best) or an over demanding father who wants his son to be the Prince That Was Promised (at worst).

If Jon Snow knew how bad Rhaegar hurt his mother, Jon would hate him.

Of course, this isn't to say he'd get the chance to know Rhaegar. If Lyanna was at the Red Keep as Rhaegar's unwilling salt wife, then Elia would be sympathetic to her plight and even help her escape (this would give Elia a way to get rid of Lyanna and Jon bloodlessly, and therefore ensure that Aegon's rights to the Iron Throne are not endangered).

 

Thanks,

[addicted to snow]

Arthur=daddy has nothing going for it. But by all means, feel free to lay out your best case in its own thread and put it to the test, as R+L=J has done, and as, much as I disagree with it, A+J=T has done. Cluttering this thread up with claims of viable alternative options without ever providing any substance just amounts to, well, I wouldn't want to get another warning, but I'm sure you can deduce what I mean.

No, I can not deduce what you mean... please elaborate...

 

GRRM's imagination is limitless... He spent 30 years planning this series before he ever got started... R+L=J is probably correct, but way too simple... there is more to the story than has yet be revealed...

[Sly Wren]

Arthur=daddy has nothing going for it. But by all means, feel free to lay out your best case in its own thread and put it to the test, as R+L=J has done, and as, much as I disagree with it, A+J=T has done. Cluttering this thread up with claims of viable alternative options without ever providing any substance just amounts to, well, I wouldn't want to get another warning, but I'm sure you can deduce what I mean.

Was asserting that establishing an objective standard for evaluating viability of theories about fictional characters in an unfinished work seems impossible. Which it does. Arthur and Rhaegar statements simply part of that larger point. Everyone has opinions and there is no objective standard. Which was also my point in the arguments above. But if discussing ideas about how well RLJ works (subjectively) and implications of it don't belong on this thread, not sure where they would belong.

 

Hello,

 

I pulled this out of the "Would Rhaegar and Jon Snow been buddies" thread. Just wondering if this guy nailed it or not:

 

 

 

Thanks,

Only scenario that really works in my head for Rhaegar and Lyanna is kidnap, too. Though perhaps not exactly the scenario given by the person you quoted.

 

But parenting? Oy! Ned managed a pretty good relationship with Jon despite Cat's displeasure and the tension it created. But given all the Rhaegar would be dealing with had he survived--having "the whole family" together could get very awkward very fast. Separation means very hard to parent and build relationships. So, in this extremely hypothetical situation--seems like it would have been very hard to maintain a happy family situation--whether or not that might mean Jon hates his father seems almost impossible to guess.

[The Twinslayer]

 

His breath, but not his flame. Hot air was all that hit her there. 

The confusion here stems from the idea that GRRM creates special phrases that have to mean the same thing to every character who uses those phrases, or similar ones.  The idea is that GRRM uses a phrase like "bloody bed" (childbirth) to mean the same thing as "bed of blood."  (Or "booming voice" always has to come from someone large).

 

So when Quentyn Martell is burned up by a "furnace wind" coming out of a dragon's mouth, and Dany is "engulfed" in a "furnace wind" that comes out of Drogon's mouth but only burns her hair, people get the idea that Dany is fireproof. The fact that she isn't fireproof just proves that different characters can use the same (or similar) phrases to mean different things.  

[corbon]

Hello,

 

I pulled this out of the "Would Rhaegar and Jon Snow been buddies" thread. Just wondering if this guy nailed it or not:

 

 

 

Thanks,

 

It seems unlikely (that he nailed it), based on the data in the books.

Its almost impossible to tell if they would have been buddies. Friendship is a strange thing, where it works and where it does not. They almost seem too alike to be friends in some ways, but who can tell.

[RumHam]

The confusion here stems from the idea that GRRM creates special phrases that have to mean the same thing to every character who uses those phrases, or similar ones.  The idea is that GRRM uses a phrase like "bloody bed" (childbirth) to mean the same thing as "bed of blood."  (Or "booming voice" always has to come from someone large).

 

So when Quentyn Martell is burned up by a "furnace wind" coming out of a dragon's mouth, and Dany is "engulfed" in a "furnace wind" that comes out of Drogon's mouth but only burns her hair, people get the idea that Dany is fireproof. The fact that she isn't fireproof just proves that different characters can use the same (or similar) phrases to mean different things.  

 

Hm, I don't really think your argument applies here. Quentyn wasn't burned up by the furnace wind. He just experienced it shorty before being burned up by dragonfire. Just because the furnace wind preceded the fire breath does not mean that what Quentyn describes as a "furnace wind" was the flame. 

 

The only other mention of the phrase is Tyrion describing the heat from the wildfire trap at the Blackwater:

 

The low clouds caught the color of the burning river and roofed the sky in shades of shifting green, eerily beautiful. A terrible beauty. Like dragonfire. Tyrion wondered if Aegon the Conqueror had felt like this as he flew above his Field of Fire.

The furnace wind lifted his crimson cloak and beat at his bare face, yet he could not turn away. 

 

 

So I think it's clear from the context of the three times it's used that it means a blast of hot air, like one would encounter opening a furnace. 

 

http://asearchoficeandfire.com/?q=furnace+wind

[Attitude]

No, I can not deduce what you mean... please elaborate...

 

GRRM's imagination is limitless... He spent 30 years planning this series before he ever got started... R+L=J is probably correct, but way too simple... there is more to the story than has yet be revealed...

 

Where did you get the point that he had 30 years of planning? Do you mean up to today, or up to when he started with his first book?

 

Since the letter he first sent about this book states there will be something revealed about Jons parentage, I can't imagine anything else but R+L=J. Nothing would make more sense nor would fit even better. Not saying that will mean he will (or won't) be King, but he will be a Targ. 

[The Khal Who Rode West]

Since the letter he first sent about this book states there will be something revealed about Jons parentage, I can't imagine anything else but R+L=J. Nothing would make more sense nor would fit even better. Not saying that will mean he will (or won't) be King, but he will be a Targ. 

How does Jon being Rhaegar and Lyanna's son help Jon bang Arya more than any other combination? Because that's what the letter says that Jon's parentage lets him do: bang Arya. Not be king of Westoros, be a Targaryen, or anything else. His parentage is about it not being incest when he and Arya have sex according to the letter.

Catelyn Stark will be forced to flee north with her son Bran and her daughter Arya. Hounded by Lannister riders, they will seek refuge at the Wall, but the men of the Night's Watch give up their families when they take the black, and Jon and Benjen will not be able to help, to Jon's anguish. It will lead to a bitter estrangement between Jon and Bran. Arya will be more forgiving... until she realizes, with terror, that she has fallen in love with Jon, who is not only her half-brother but a man of the Night's Watch, sworn to celibacy. Their passion will continue to torment Jon and Arya throughout the trilogy, until the secret of Jon's true parentage is finally revealed in the last book.

The letter doesn't point to RLJ at all. It just points to Eddard not being Jon's father. Which isn't the same thing.

[Ygrain]

Hello,

 

I pulled this out of the "Would Rhaegar and Jon Snow been buddies" thread. Just wondering if this guy nailed it or not:

 

 

 

Thanks,

No way.

[Attitude]

How does Jon being Rhaegar and Lyanna's son help Jon bang Arya more than any other combination? Because that's what the letter says that Jon's parentage lets him do: bang Arya. Not be king of Westoros, be a Targaryen, or anything else. His parentage is about it not being incest when he and Arya have sex according to the letter.


The letter doesn't point to RLJ at all. It just points to Eddard not being Jon's father. Which isn't the same thing.

 

I think you are misinterpreting my words.

 

Yes the letter pretty much says; ‘when his parentage is revealed, they can finally bang eachother.’ That’s true, but I didn’t mean that the letter on itself says anything about R+L=J.

 

What I said (or what I mean to say) was; Jon’s parentage will be revealed; so everything we heard so far (Jon being Neds bastard) isn’t true.

The above means that there is some ‘secrecy’ about Jons parentage. At this point, I only see one (other) option for Jon’s parentage (besides simply being Neds bastard); and that is R+L. You can disagree on the fact that this is the only (reasonable) option, but that’s this entire topic about. All I see is that I see that option as the only one that makes sense to me.

 

Going a bit more OT and not talking about ‘how I meant something’ I would like to ask you to give me an alternative to R+L=J which makes sense. I never figured out R+L=J myself, but seeing all the overwhelming evidence this community gathered (and asking a lot of questions about that info) got me convinced. GRRM isn’t going to make his parentage such a clue to end it with some stupid reveal that doesn’t mean anything. Jons parentage is way to big in the books to mean something, and R+L=J can influence Jons story a lot.

But if you have an good alternative, please enlighten me because I would love to see a good alternative (preferably with good support from the books too! ;))

[The Khal Who Rode West]

 
I think you are misinterpreting my words.
 
Yes the letter pretty much says; ‘when his parentage is revealed, they can finally bang eachother.’ That’s true, but I didn’t mean that the letter on itself says anything about R+L=J.
 
What I said (or what I mean to say) was; Jon’s parentage will be revealed; so everything we heard so far (Jon being Neds bastard) isn’t true.
The above means that there is some ‘secrecy’ about Jons parentage. At this point, I only see one (other) option for Jon’s parentage (besides simply being Neds bastard); and that is R+L. You can disagree on the fact that this is the only (reasonable) option, but that’s this entire topic about. All I see is that I see that option as the only one that makes sense to me.
 
Going a bit more OT and not talking about ‘how I meant something’ I would like to ask you to give me an alternative to R+L=J which makes sense. I never figured out R+L=J myself, but seeing all the overwhelming evidence this community gathered (and asking a lot of questions about that info) got me convinced. GRRM isn’t going to make his parentage such a clue to end it with some stupid reveal that doesn’t mean anything. Jons parentage is way to big in the books to mean something, and R+L=J can influence Jons story a lot.
But if you have an good alternative, please enlighten me because I would love to see a good alternative (preferably with good support from the books too! ;))

I wasn't disagreeing with RLJ. I was just saying that the letter isn't evidence of RLJ as nowhere does it point to that, just that Ned isn't Jon's father. Evidence that Ned isn't Jon's father doesn't automatically mean that it's evidence for RLJ. For instance, people often use Bran's vision of a younger Ned asking for two people to grow up like brothers as evidence of RLJ. It's not. It's simply evidence that Ned might not be Jon's father as if he's not then Jon is not Robb's brother and Ned wants the two to grow up as if they were because they're not.

Believe me there is evidence of RLJ and it's the most likely answer. But some things are just evidence that Ned isn't Jon's father... not specifically that Jon is the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna.

[Attitude]

I wasn't disagreeing with RLJ. I was just saying that the letter isn't evidence of RLJ as nowhere does it point to that, just that Ned isn't Jon's father. Evidence that Ned isn't Jon's father doesn't automatically mean that it's evidence for RLJ. For instance, people often use Bran's vision of a younger Ned asking for two people to grow up like brothers as evidence of RLJ. It's not. It's simply evidence that Ned might not be Jon's father as if he's not then Jon is not Robb's brother and Ned wants the two to grow up as if they were because they're not.

Believe me there is evidence of RLJ and it's the most likely answer. But some things are just evidence that Ned isn't Jon's father... not specifically that Jon is the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna.

 

Agreed.

 

Btw, it does support R+L=J. It doesn't make R+L+J the exclusive awnser, but it does support the theory ;) That was the point I was trying to make (and in which I apperently didn't succeed in at the first go). 

[TheSmallOther]

 

Where did you get the point that he had 30 years of planning? Do you mean up to today, or up to when he started with his first book?

 

Since the letter he first sent about this book states there will be something revealed about Jons parentage, I can't imagine anything else but R+L=J. Nothing would make more sense nor would fit even better. Not saying that will mean he will (or won't) be King, but he will be a Targ. 

 

I'd rather expect there will no king at all at the end of the series. And GRRM has promised us a bittersweet ending. Don't think Jon becoming a king fits that 'bittersweet' description.

[Ygrain]

 

I'd rather expect there will no king at all at the end of the series. And GRRM has promised us a bittersweet ending. Don't think Jon becoming a king fits that 'bittersweet' description.

If he becomes a king out of necessity and totally hates it, that might qualify, IMHO.

[Attitude]

I'd rather expect there will no king at all at the end of the series. And GRRM has promised us a bittersweet ending. Don't think Jon becoming a king fits that 'bittersweet' description.

 

I can see the series ending in total chaos ór a new political system. 

 

If he becomes a king out of necessity and totally hates it, that might qualify, IMHO.

 

I could live with that too.

[BearQueen87]

If he becomes a king out of necessity and totally hates it, that might qualify, IMHO.

 

One of Jon's biggest themes is duty vs love (okay, it's a big theme in the entire series but just to focus on Jon for a second). I can totally see Jon having to chose between duty to the realm and love (don't know for whom but it could be anyone; it doesn't necessarily have to be romantic) and Jon chooses duty. That's bittersweet IMO. He's making the right decision to rule the kingdoms but giving up someone/something he loves as the price.

[Attitude]

 

One of Jon's biggest themes is duty vs love (okay, it's a big theme in the entire series but just to focus on Jon for a second). I can totally see Jon having to chose between duty to the realm and love (don't know for whom but it could be anyone; it doesn't necessarily have to be romantic) and Jon chooses duty. That's bittersweet IMO. He's making the right decision to rule the kingdoms but giving up someone/something he loves as the price.

 

So he gives up banging Arya for the Throne with Dany? Makes sense.. 

 

edit; Thrones -> Throne

[UnmaskedLurker]

Was asserting that establishing an objective standard for evaluating viability of theories about fictional characters in an unfinished work seems impossible. Which it does. Arthur and Rhaegar statements simply part of that larger point. Everyone has opinions and there is no objective standard. Which was also my point in the arguments above. But if discussing ideas about how well RLJ works (subjectively) and implications of it don't belong on this thread, not sure where they would belong.

 

Only scenario that really works in my head for Rhaegar and Lyanna is kidnap, too. Though perhaps not exactly the scenario given by the person you quoted.

 

But parenting? Oy! Ned managed a pretty good relationship with Jon despite Cat's displeasure and the tension it created. But given all the Rhaegar would be dealing with had he survived--having "the whole family" together could get very awkward very fast. Separation means very hard to parent and build relationships. So, in this extremely hypothetical situation--seems like it would have been very hard to maintain a happy family situation--whether or not that might mean Jon hates his father seems almost impossible to guess.

I disagree with the bolded. While perhaps there cannot be 100% certainty until the truth is revealed in the books, lack of 100% certainty is not the same as the impossibility of an objective standard. An objective standard is a standard that indicates that the solution to a mystery that most closely adheres to all the available clues and ancillary information is most likely to be the solution to the mystery. I consider that standard to be an objective standard. Of course, there is always some subjectivity in applying an objective standard because we are human beings who have to use judgment in applying even an objective standard -- and judgment always involves some amount of subjectivity. But the standard itself remains objective.

 

For me, applying such an objective standard to the question of Jon's parentage leads me to conclude that R+L=J is the most likely solution to the mystery -- without a close second. One caveat -- given that GRRM has total control to the solution to this mystery -- this objective standard assumes that GRRM is not lying when he says he will not change the solution from what he intended when he wrote GoT. But again, I consider such a assumption to be a reasonable assumption in connection with the overall objective standard outlined above. 

 

Based on this objective standard -- which as I have admitted does not guarantee being correct -- Lyanna as the mother and Rhaegar as the father is the clear choice. I disagree that there are any "holes" in the Rhaegar theory. Based on my recollection from past exchanges, your "holes" are issues that I consider to be easily explained. For me, "holes" in a theory mean evidence that points against the theory that are difficult to explain away or issues that are difficult to reconcile with the theory. While not every aspect of the situation has been spelled out explicitly for the readers yet, Rhaegar as father is consistent with all of the evidence we have been given -- no other candidate comes close.

[BearQueen87]

 

So he gives up banging Arya for the Throne with Dany? Makes sense.. 

 

edit; Thrones -> Throne

 

 

I have no idea how you got that from what I wrote.