224 replies to this topic

[Hear Us Roar]

Is anyone else fine with this if it turns out to be the case?

[Ser Hippie]

Then Ned was stupid beyond belief to not say so. It'd make him look like an insensitive jerk, at best.

Edited by Ser Hippie, 03 May 2012 - 11:08 PM.

[Ororo727 Jon Snow Fangirl]

Ser Hippie, on 03 May 2012 - 11:07 PM, said:

Then Ned was stupid beyond belief to not say so. It'd make him look like an insensitive jerk, at best.

He did say Jon was his son, he just never told who the mother was.

[Howling Mad]

I'm ok with it because then the reveal behind the TOJ will really be surprising.

[Manderly is Boss]

Quote

… but then somehow he was back at Winterfell again, in the gods-wood looking down upon his
father. Lord Eddard seemed much younger this time. His hair was brown, with no hint of grey in it, his
head bowed. “… let them grow up close as brothers, with only love between them,”

Seems to me from his own mouth Eddard has clearly identified them as NOT being brothers.

[Silver Spearwife]

If Ned is Jon's father, then Jon's mother better be a damned good reveal.

[Catastrophe]

I'm fine with it as long as the reveal makes sense. I could definitely see Jon being Ned and Ashara's son, but if he turns out to be the offspring of Ned and some random fisherman's daughter I'll be pissed.

[Ser Hippie]

Ororo727 Jon Snow Fangirl, on 03 May 2012 - 11:10 PM, said:

He did say Jon was his son, he just never told who the mother was.

I can't think of a single possible (i.e. we know it couldn't be Elia Martell) mother that would require hiding Jon's parentage, if Ned was the father. Ideas?

Edited by Ser Hippie, 03 May 2012 - 11:19 PM.

[Jem]

I think that it still will be interesting for us to find out who Jon's mother is, the circumstances of his birth/conception and why Ned didn't tell anyone who she is/was. Ned would need a really compelling reason for keeping her identity a secret (it was Rhaella Targaryen, wasn't it!) or else he will look like a total jerk for with-holding that info from Jon.

[Tumnas the Torpid]

ManderlyIsBoss, on 03 May 2012 - 11:14 PM, said:

Seems to me from his own mouth Eddard has clearly identified them as NOT being brothers.

The problem is, if Ned is Jon's father (which construction is pretty hilarious to see as a thread topic, in that we've never actually been told otherwise), than Jon and Robb would be half-brothers.  Martin loves to tantalize us with near-reveals all the time.

[Manderly is Boss]

Tumnas the Torpid, on 03 May 2012 - 11:26 PM, said:

The problem is, if Ned is Jon's father (which construction is pretty hilarious to see as a thread topic, in that we've never actually been told otherwise), than Jon and Robb would be half-brothers.  Martin loves to tantalize us with near-reveals all the time.

Half-brothers are brothers. Or maybe that's my interpretation.

[Not A Lannister]

I'd be fine with it, but I would laugh my ass off in a "I can't believe I and several others spent large amounts of time invested in R+L=J when we knew the truth all along" kind of way.

Also I think it would make Jon even better? What I mean is, instead of being a product of R+L and doing great things, he'd be just a high lords bastard meant for great things. *shrugs*

[BondJamesBond]

This is such a great question.  Honestly, George's genius is constantly keeping the reader engaged in trying to figure out the deeper answers.  Deep down I think he has a great reveal planned that absolutely no one anticipated, though I am simultaneously a big believer in r plus l equals j.  It is maddening trying to piece it together.  

That being said, I would be satisfied knowing Jon was Ned's son bc GRRM will definitely do it right whatever the heck he has planned. It would be awesome if it was Ned plus a Targaryen equals Jon and that is why he kept it a secret, but it doesn't explain " promise me Ned" or any of the tower of joy events.

[Catastrophe]

Trish, on 03 May 2012 - 11:34 PM, said:

Also I think it would make Jon even better? What I mean is, instead of being a product of R+L and doing great things, he'd be just a high lords bastard meant for great things. *shrugs*

Either way he'd just be a high lord's bastard. The only difference is who the high lord happened to be.

Edited by Catastrophe, 03 May 2012 - 11:37 PM.

[Not A Lannister]

ManderlyIsBoss, on 03 May 2012 - 11:34 PM, said:

Half-brothers are brothers. Or maybe that's my interpretation.

I've noticed that in real life people tend to refer to siblings connected by just a father as half-siblings and siblings connected but just a mother as just siblings. Don't know how it works in asoiaf though..

[Tumnas the Torpid]

ManderlyIsBoss, on 03 May 2012 - 11:34 PM, said:

Half-brothers are brothers. Or maybe that's my interpretation.

I myself have a half-brother whom I call 'brother', and consider my brother.  The point I was making is that, the statement originally quoted above does not constitute definitive proof, because Ned could, conceivably, have only been worried about how his trueborn sons would get along with his bastard.

[Silver Spearwife]

ManderlyIsBoss, on 03 May 2012 - 11:14 PM, said:

Seems to me from his own mouth Eddard has clearly identified them as NOT being brothers.

Tumnas the Torpid, on 03 May 2012 - 11:26 PM, said:

The problem is, if Ned is Jon's father (which construction is pretty hilarious to see as a thread topic, in that we've never actually been told otherwise), than Jon and Robb would be half-brothers.  Martin loves to tantalize us with near-reveals all the time.

Well, he could've just been saying that because it's not all that common for bastards to be raised so closely to their trueborn siblings (not unheard of, just...not common). Bastards and trueborn siblings usually don't grow up like brothers. (Playing devil's advocate, by the way - I believe that that line is Martin deliberately tantalizing the R+L=J supporters).

[Not A Lannister]

Catastrophe, on 03 May 2012 - 11:37 PM, said:

Either way he'd just be a high lord's bastard. The only difference is who the high lord happened to be.

Possibly, though I lean towards the part of the theory that Rhaegar and Lyanna got married in some fashion.

Then again, Rhaegar was quite confident that he wouldn't die during the rebellion and may have believed he didn't need his "child" by Lyanna legit right away, and that he could deal with that issue when he became king. Though I'm getting off topic.

Edited by Trish, 03 May 2012 - 11:43 PM.

[Apple Martini]

If it is Ned — and I don't believe it is, but I'll play along — then Jon's mother better be the jaw-dropper of all jaw-droppers. And not like, Wylla or a fisherman's daughter or even Ashara. Like, Ned went back in time and fathered Jon on his own grandmother. I can't think of many, if any, "mother reveals" that would be boat-rocking enough to make sense in the face of all the absurd secrecy.

[Howling Mad]

Apple Martini, on 03 May 2012 - 11:47 PM, said:

If it is Ned — and I don't believe it is, but I'll play along — then Jon's mother better be the jaw-dropper of all jaw-droppers. And not like, Wylla or a fisherman's daughter or even Ashara. Like, Ned went back in time and fathered Jon on his own grandmother. I can't think of many, if any, "mother reveals" that would be boat-rocking enough to make sense in the face of all the absurd secrecy.

Well if Ned were the father and Lyanna was his mother