David Selig Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 In real life sure but this is a story not real life. This is a world where litterally every detail is intentionally put there and crafted for the purposes of the story. Whether you're creative enough to come up with a way to prove Jon is a Targ to Westeros doesn't really matter because as Apple said, GRRM would not include it as part of the story, wouldn't make Jon's parents the first big mystery in the series, if he hadn't already figured out a way to prove to Westeros AND HAVE AT LEAST A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE ACCEPT IT.Sure there will be people who don't but there are going to be people who have no interest in the Targ coming back and will want to believe that Jon is a fraud, the same way there will be a whole bunch of people who are pre-disposed to believing it is true, but the fact that you can't come up with a way is not the determining factor as to whether the theory is true or whether it will be important to the story. Sorry but that is just the way it is.For all we know, the whole point of R=L=J is to add to Jon's character development and on a meta level to provide a mystery for the readers. There's no proof that it will matter in the overall plot. Your claim that GRRM would not include it "if he hadn't already figured out a way to prove to Westeros AND HAVE AT LEAST A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE ACCEPT IT." is pure speculation and nothing more.Besides, I was talking specifically about the marriage, not just Jon being a son of Rhaegar and Lyanna. The latter would'be very hard to prove and convince people of, but there's some small chance to be done somewhat plausibly. After all, Lyanna and Rhaegar spent plenty of time together, and it was believed he raped her. And Jon looks like Lyanna. The marriage part, though, given how long it has been since the Targs practised bigamy and that it was never a custom of the Stark, gets too much even for a fantasy series, in my opinion. People would be naturally sceptical to accept it as more than obviously made up justification for Jon's claim to the Iron Throne. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon's Queen Consort Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 Ok, but dragontamer wasn't complaining about whoever brought the writers up, (s)he was complaining about the whole idea of using Helen and Paris at all in the argument. Which is most certainly something that you brought up first.Yes I don't deny it. I found the two stories very similar and I told that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonfish Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 How is Jon's claim greater than Viserys? Rhaeghar died before Aerys, so wouldn't that mean Viserys inherits the throne?No, Rhaegar's children aren't eliminated from the line of succession simply because their father wasn't king. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naathi Prince Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 How is Jon's claim greater than Viserys? Rhaeghar died before Aerys, so wouldn't that mean Viserys inherits the throne?No, The line of the oldest son comes first, whether he is alive or dead. For example, if Robb had "put a baby in Jeyne's belly", that child would have primacy over Bran, Rickson, Sansa, and Arya. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasha Steelsong Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 How is Jon's claim greater than Viserys? Rhaeghar died before Aerys, so wouldn't that mean Viserys inherits the throne?Because a first son's line inherits before a second son. The order of succession before the Trident was as follows:Aerys --> Rhaegar --> AEGON --> Viserys because Aegon what Rhaegar's heir. If Jon is proved to be legitimate he would come after his older half-brother but before his uncle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 How is Jon's claim greater than Viserys? Rhaeghar died before Aerys, so wouldn't that mean Viserys inherits the throne?What other people have said.To use a real-world hypothetical example, if Prince Charles dies before Queen Elizabeth, Prince William is next in line, not Prince Andrew.For a historical example, Edward the Black Prince died before Edward III. His son Richard II, Edward III's grandson, became king when Edward III died, not John of Gaunt (Edward III's next surviving son). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasha Steelsong Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 For all we know, the whole point of R=L=J is to add to Jon's character development and on a meta level to provide a mystery for the readers. There's no proof that it will matter in the overall plot. Your claim that GRRM would not include it "if he hadn't already figured out a way to prove to Westeros AND HAVE AT LEAST A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE ACCEPT IT." is pure speculation and nothing more.Besides, I was talking specifically about the marriage, not just Jon being a son of Rhaegar and Lyanna. The latter would'be very hard to prove and convince people of, but there's some small chance to be done somewhat plausibly. After all, Lyanna and Rhaegar spent plenty of time together, and it was believed he raped her. And Jon looks like Lyanna. The marriage part, though, given how long it has been since the Targs practised bigamy and that it was never a custom of the Stark, gets too much even for a fantasy series, in my opinion. People would be naturally sceptical to accept it as more than obviously made up justification for Jon's claim to the Iron Throne.My claim about GRRM is not just speculation...it is how any good writer would approach a story and I consider him to be a good writer. That he may have elaborated on the series he set out to write doesn't change that he's had an idea where this is going from the very beginning. And if Jon is legitimate (I acknowlege the possibility that he isn't but don't think it is likely given the KG) then GRRM is not going to include that for just a meta reason. Despite what people seem to want to believe he is not writing this series as a work of meta fantasy meant to subvert ever normal fantasy trope, he is and always has been just telling a very detailed, creative, and involved story.I too was talking specifically about the marriage and the point is that the marriage would not be included and Jon would not be made legitimate without it having a place in the story and without GRRM having a way to prove it to the characters in the story. He isn't going to set it up that Jon is Lyanna and Rhaegar's, have it so they married so he really is legitimate and then have it impossible to prove so it amounts to nothing. Again that you think it goes to far is no official line that will not happen. The simple fact is there is that if GRRM wants Jon to be legitimate, he will write the characters to have a reason to accept it...regardless of how skeptical people in real life might be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angalin Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 Closing thread for length.Before anyone starts a successor thread, keep in mind that there's already a series of threads devoted to R+L=J pinned at the top of the forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.