142 replies to this topic

[Elaena Targaryen]

redriver, on 03 February 2012 - 07:19 AM, said:

Shiera was a half sister to Bloodraven and Bittersteel.I was more wondering if Serra was of Shiera's line,if she had one?

I must read the other D&E stories.

Ohhh, got ya, I'm tired and I thought you meant Shiera might be Lemore because I have read theories like that, and Quaithe as well, if Bloodraven is still around why not Shiera I quess.

[Kuragin]

Massive round of applause - take a bow son, take a bow!

[Bran Vras]

Another minor indication that Young Griff may be a Blackfyre resides in the way he dresses before being presented to the Golden Company.

His appearance is prepared with great care. He dresses preeminently in black, with some touches of red (lining, and rubies). Griff approves the use of "dragon colours". Red and Black are the colours of both Targaryens and Blackfyre. But the black, which is dominant on Young Griff, is associated with the Blackfyres (a connection that Griff does not make).

This does not prove much. If the choice of colours deliberately hints at the Blackfyre, it might only mean that Young Griff intends to appeal to the Blackfyre past of the Golden Company. After all, he can appear a Targaryen to the Targaryen supporters, why not a Blackfyre to the Blackfyre supporters, while being still another person?

Edited by Bran Vras, 03 February 2012 - 12:18 PM.

[Nev yn]

Quote

He dresses preeminently in black, with some touches of red (lining, and rubies). Griff approves of the use of "dragon colours". Red and Black are the colours of both Targaryens and Blackfyre. But the black, which is dominant on Young Griff, is associated with the Blackfyres (a connection that Griff does not make).

I was thinking of that (also with connection to the rubies in a black setting mentioned in a different thread), but the Targaryen colors are red on black, with Blackfyre being black on red.  The color schemes Griff is dressed with fit Targaryen, unless the colors are normally inverted in dress.

[Bran Vras]

Nev yn, on 03 February 2012 - 11:40 AM, said:

I was thinking of that (also with connection to the rubies in a black setting mentioned in a different thread), but the Targaryen colors are red on black, with Blackfyre being black on red.  The color schemes Griff is dressed with fit Targaryen, unless the colors are normally inverted in dress.

I am the one who started the other thread. Both my posts come from the same attempt at being an attentive reader.

Edited by Bran Vras, 03 February 2012 - 12:11 PM.

[Nev yn]

I'm aware.  So no thoughts on how the color scheme matches Targaryen, whereas to really match Blackfyre they'd have to be reversed?

[Bran Vras]

When you say black on red, it means the black Blackfyre dragon is on a red background. By this logic Young Griff, being dressed mainly in black, is himself the black dragon. (No red dragon on his black cloak, just some red lining, purely decorative.)

But I don't know enough about heraldry and dress code to have a strong opinion on this. You might be right.

Insignificant notes, for what they are worth: 1) Septa Lemore has prepared Aegon, perhaps following Illyrio's instructions. Griff has nothing to do with it.
2) This discussion about the cloak with the red lining reminds me of the story of Mance with the black cloak sewed in red.

[Melpomene]

Niiiiiiiiiiiiceeee.


Hahaha, I feel all excited now. Finding out surprise theories/evidence like this is always fun.


I reckon it makes sense, and quite a move - sneaking a Blackfyre onto the throne under everyone's noses like that. It's like "HAHA, GOT YOU~! We lied, he was not a Targ after all! Buahahaha! But a Blackfyre! BUAHAHA!! you should have seen your face! Lol"



Now curious on how the future will play out, assuming the alleged connections are true and GRRM is not just tugging some heartstrings.

[Silent_Hero]

Apple Martini, on 03 February 2012 - 02:46 AM, said:

If you've taken offense because you've over analyzed and think you have the right answer I respectfully point out your not GRRM. And I believe it's too easy from the way it's mentioned and going back and reading it and making the connection.

This is something that went over the heads of probably 99% of readers, including a lot of us on here who dissect this to within an inch of its life, and you think it's "too easy"? Really?

So what are you saying exactly? Yes I think to give away YG like this "too easy". It could be a herring, most likely GRRM wont even reveal if YG is real or Fake.

Edited by Silent_Hero, 03 February 2012 - 01:39 PM.

[Apple Martini]

Silent_Hero, on 03 February 2012 - 01:34 PM, said:

So what are you saying exactly? Yes I think to give away YG like this "too easy". It could be a herring, most likely GRRM wont even reveal if YG is real or Fake.

I'm saying that you can't really say it's "too easy" when the vast majority of readers didn't catch it. If it was "too easy," everyone and their dog would have already caught it, it would have been written in a far less subtle way, we'd be on the fifth dissection thread by now and, yes, it's likelier that in that case it would be a red herring. This is clearly a new lightbulb going off for just about everyone on here — people likelier to catch little things and go over them, let alone casual readers who miss a lot — so no, I don't think it can be written off as "too easy." If you write a red herring that everyone misses, it's a pretty bad red herring. A red herring is something that people are meant to notice easily and that diverts them from the true story. An example being the brick-subtle anecdote that Davos hears about Jon's mother being a fisherman's daughter. If you write a red herring that everybody misses, what's the point?

More likely it's either a foreshadowing easter egg or it's a coincidence and means nothing.

[Silent_Hero]

Apple Martini, on 03 February 2012 - 02:19 PM, said:

I'm saying that you can't really say it's "too easy" when the vast majority of readers didn't catch it. If it was "too easy," everyone and their dog would have already caught it, it would have been written in a far less subtle way, we'd be on the fifth dissection thread by now and, yes, it's likelier that in that case it would be a red herring. This is clearly a new lightbulb going off for just about everyone on here — people likelier to catch little things and go over them, let alone casual readers who miss a lot — so no, I don't think it can be written off as "too easy." If you write a red herring that everyone misses, it's a pretty bad red herring. A red herring is something that people are meant to notice easily and that diverts them from the true story. An example being the brick-subtle anecdote that Davos hears about Jon's mother being a fisherman's daughter. If you write a red herring that everybody misses, what's the point?

More likely it's either a foreshadowing easter egg or it's a coincidence and means nothing.

I completely didn't catch the reference while reading AFFC, so props to the OP or whoever caught it. I'm just saying it seems too easy for GRRM to give away Aegon like that  so nonchalantly IMO, or maybe I'm expecting too much like a huge reveal or something for YG identity.  But The possibilities are endless, a herring, foreshadowing, random info, something else entirely who knows, maybe GRRM will not reveal who YG is.

[Wouter]

Silent_Hero, on 03 February 2012 - 01:34 PM, said:

So what are you saying exactly? Yes I think to give away YG like this "too easy". It could be a herring, most likely GRRM wont even reveal if YG is real or Fake.

It's very unlikely GRRM won't ever reveal that. Especially with a prophecy (house of the undying) that explicitly mentions a false dragons, and with guys like Tyrion showing doubts about Aegon's identity.

And the reference found here (nice catch!) is a very obscure one. You need to read ADWD before (re)reading AFFC to have even a chance of 'getting it'.

[Silent_Hero]

Wouter, on 03 February 2012 - 02:46 PM, said:

It's very unlikely GRRM won't ever reveal that. Especially with a prophecy (house of the undying) that explicitly mentions a false dragons, and with guys like Tyrion showing doubts about Aegon's identity.

And the reference found here (nice catch!) is a very obscure one. You need to read ADWD before (re)reading AFFC to have even a chance of 'getting it'.

It's great writing you can appreciate, mainly for the reason you can interpret things. As i stated to AppleMartini it could be a herring or foreshadowing or just random info which makes the book all the more addictive.

[Bajaz]

Good catch,I read Dance with Dragons year after I read Feast for Crows,didnt notice this story.Who knows it is possible,my faith in Aegon is a bit shaken.

[Red Rain]

Cheers I totally dismissed that

[Nev yn]

Quote

By this logic Young Griff, being dressed mainly in black, is himself the black dragon. (No red dragon on his black cloak, just some red lining, purely decorative.)

That's a good point.  I was getting caught up in foreground/background and not thinking of the actual symbols.  And thanks for that, because I really do prefer the theory where Aegon was a Blackfyre and was looking for some tentative support.

[Darth Vader's Bastard]

love it!

[TheHedgeWizard]

Incredible i love this. always thought that aegon was a blackfyre. grrm has written about the blackfyres too much for one not to pop up somewhere in ASOIAF. very exciting.

[hotweaselsoup]

[Ser Illin']

I've been reading FFC through for a second time, and I totally picked up on this, but it looks like people have beaten me to the punch. Well done, sir/madam. If Aegon turns out to be fake, I will remember this passage as one of GRRM's best moments.