The Hidden Dragon

Members
  • Content count

    41
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About The Hidden Dragon

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    I wouldn't be hidden if I told you!
  1. Again, no idea what you are hinting at here. When Robb slept with Jeyne, he immediately sought to make right by her and married her, no matter the cost to himself and his cause. How is this parallel to Ned supposedly sleeping with Ashara, marrying her in secret, and then letting her face public dishonor of a bastard child, so that he could pursue his political goal of the Tully alliance? Besides, does this really sound like The Ned to you? Let me tell you that one of the main points that made me question Ned's paternity was how terribly out of character it was for him. To begin with - Ygrain, I love your signature. Great GRRM quote. Now onto my post.... Devil's advocate here. Parallels - Robb slept with Jeyne, married her to do right by her. Ned (supposedly I admit) slept with Ashara, married her to do right by her. Yes, those are parallels. Obviously, their stories diverge from there. Onto "letting her face public dishonor of a bastard child" - that's made up right? Is there anywhere in the story where we are told that Ashara birthed a bastard and faced public dishonor for it? I don't think so but I'm always willing to be corrected. Then "so that he could pursue his political goal of the Tully alliance" - you think that was Ned's goal....or maybe Rickard's goal? Because THAT does not sound like The Ned to me. But what does sound like Ned? How about falling in love/lust, marrying, then, faced with the murder of his father and brother and the ensuing war, being forced to renounce that marriage in order to protect and defend his family and his best friend by marrying another to secure an important alliance not of his making? (horrible run on sentence there - sorry). That self sacrifice DOES sound like Ned to me. Caveat - I do not subscribe to N+A=J, but I do subscribe to N+A. Oh, and apologies to @Feather Crystal, if your OP has been high jacked some...
  2. @Ser Insight thanks for the reply. One thing to note - Ned's "story" about Jon, one that he's told consistently for the last 15 years, is that Jon is his bastard son, which means that Ned has been telling the entire world that Jon is his son. So, in that case, Ned using the plural "sons" out loud in reference to Robb and Jon means nothing, because he is literally telling everyone, everyday, that Jon is his son by claiming that Jon is his bastard. I think you may want to reopen your case. On R+L=J, you'll note that my post did not mention R+L=J at all. In fact, I'm not convinced of R+L=J. I like the idea of N+A, because that adds depth to Ned's character (i.e. a 2nd son, never destined to rule, who found love with a beautiful women, but who was forced to give up that love to meet his family's alliance obligations by marrying his older brother's betrothed following the murder of his father and brother). But I can't subscribe to N+A=J because I can't fathom Jon being Ned's son when GRRM has Ned reciting the names of all his children, in order, and not mentioning Jon.
  3. Can you please explain Jon being Ned's child in light of Ned's thoughts while speaking with Cersei in AGOT, Eddard XII. During that conversation Ned thinks of his children and mentally names each one separately, but does not name Jon. Here is the quote "Ned thought, If it came to that, the life of some child I did not know, against Robb and Sansa and Arya and Bran and Rickon, what would I do?" I take this to mean that Jon is not Ned's child, elsewise why would Ned (and by extension, GRRM) exclude Jon from a list of Ned's children that so specifically names each child in turn from the eldest to the youngest. Anxiously awaiting your reply...
  4. Robert's head on Clegane's body? Wow. I haven't read that one before. That certainly would be shocking and quite cool! Yes, the obvious interpretation of GRRM's words is not always the one he intends. On that point, what are your thoughts on this... "It would have to be his grandfather, for Jory's father was buried far to the south. Martyn Cassel had perished with the rest. Ned had pulled the tower down afterward, and used its bloody stones to build eight cairns upon the ridge. It was said that Rhaegar had named that place the tower of joy, but for Ned it was a bitter memory. They had been seven against three, yet only two had lived to ride away; Eddard Stark himself and the little crannogman, Howland Reed. He did not think it omened well that he should dream that dream again after so many years." The obvious interpretation is that 8 men died and that 2 lived (i.e. 8 cairns, 7 men plus 3 men minus 2 who rode away equals 8), but another interpretation is that the phrase "yet only two had lived to ride away" refers not back to the "seven against three" group, but refers back to "they" in the same sentence. And who are they - "They had been seven". Read it as " They had been seven...yet only two had lived to ride away." That interpretation leaves open the possibility the KG were not killed, but could still be alive, some or all. I'm not advocating this interpretation, although i think it would be plausible, but it's an example of how the simple interpretation of GRRM's words may not be exactly what he intends.
  5. Cheers to you too! Concede nothing! Ah, but in George's world what can we really know? Is there anything we can be certain of? George is spoonfeeding us bits of this and bits of that. Some of the medicine is real, some is a placebo. Who knows what the truth is?????? We're left to puzzle things out and as the gulf of time between ADWD and TWOW widens our imaginations leap in to fill in the gap, tripping us up and making us see shadows and princes and heroes, or are they villains, everywhere we look (I need a drink). ...yes, we don't know where the KG were, but we can reason out (is that code for speculate?) that had they been at the trident we would have heard. After all, we are told numerous times that there were 3 KG at the Trident with Rhaegar. So, I "reason" that Whent, Dayne and Hightower were not at the trident. Jaime, himself, confirms that he was the only KG at KL during the sack...so I reason that our KG were not at KL. Similar reasonings give me confidence that our KG were not at Storms End or on Dragonstone. So, where were they? Maybe at the TOJ...or maybe not. I concede nothing.
  6. And does this thrilling of your bits involve Arthur living or not? I recall that Ned seemed sad when speaking about Arthur to Arya. To me that implies that Arthur is dead.
  7. I agree, we do not have the entire story about what transpired at the TOJ. GRRM is slowly peeling away the onion. I only hope we get a full reveal at some time. I'm afraid it's in him to reveal some, but not all, thus leaving the readers to fill in the blanks.
  8. Firstly, consider your fucking french excused, including the shit that was in it! Secondly, thanks for the response. Regarding the local of the KG (I apologize if this is repetitive, but I haven't read the entire thread yet - MY OH SO BAD - but I will after this post), do you concede that the KG were not at the Trident? Do you concede that they did not flee to Dragonstone? Do you concede that they were not at KL during the sack?
  9. I agree completely.
  10. No, I don't think that is correct. Remember, all of this conversation comes from 1) a dream, 2) which we are told by GRRM is a fever dream, and 3) which GRRM tells us we should NOT take literally. The only way to lend complete credence to this conversation is to take the dream literally (i.e. that the conversation actually took place). So, if the conversation didn't really happen, what can we take from it? To preface, i'm not going to be stating anything new or groundbreaking. I think we are supposed to learn that these 3 KG were not at the trident, were absent from KL during the sack, were not at Storms End when Ned ended the siege, and they didn't flee to Dragonstone with the queen and Viserys. All of these were surprises to Ned because he did expect to see them at one or more of those places and was surprised to find them at the TOJ. Another thing to remember, we readers know more than Ned did. We are privy to the conversation betwee Jaime and Rhaegar where Rhaegar tells Jaime that he intends to make chnages when he returns from the trident. We are privy to the rumors that Rhaegar was trying to hold a council at the tourney of harrenhaal and that it was scuttled because of Aerys' surprise attendance. We are privy to Barristan's insights that Rhaegar trusted Arthur Dayne more than Barristan. Because when Ned arrives at the TOJ Ned does not know what we know, I think the dream conversation shows what Ned ASSUMES; i.e.that the KG would be loyal to the King (Aerys) and that they would have been figthing at the trident or KL or Storms End for the King or would have gone to Dragonstone to protect Viserys. Again, none of this is new, I know. But the whole TOJ dream, I believe, is a set of elabrate clues to show that the KG were at tbe TOJ protecting something important. What were they protecting? I believe its Rhaegar's heir. Who is that? The obvious answer is Jon Snow, but I think R+L=J is too simple. I want the answer to be something different!!!!
  11. Apparently, Lyanna died soon after childbirth. Ned arrived to claim her before she died. Lyanna was defended by three of the Kingsguard, ser Arthur Dayne called the Sword of the Morning, Ser Oswell Whent, and the Lord Commander Ser Gerold Hightower called the White Bull. Arthur had a sad smile, suggesting the confrontation would be bittersweet. A question remains as to the vow Gerold mentioned. Was he referring to the vow of the Kingsguard to defend the king and their duty to protect the king's family, or was it a specific vow sworn to Rhaegar at the Tower of Joy? If it was the first, that would suggest either Lyanna or the babe were of the king's family. In other words, that Rhaegar had taken Lyanna as a second wife, and/or that Rhaegar was the father of the baby. And now we see that Lyanna's roses were blue. On the topic of Ned's dream, just as a reminder, there is an SSM where GRRM indicates that this is a fever dream and, as such, should not be taken literally. Given that, I have a hard time deciding which parts of the Ned's dream to rely upon. Is the order of events correct? Are the quotes between Ned and the KG correct or not? Does it make sense that Lyanna is calling out to Ned using "Eddard" and "Lord Eddard", especially when we have Ned recalling that she called him "Dearest Ned" in an earlier memory? And why does Ned name all his friends except for Lord Dustin? Why would he list a friend by title only? I'm not trying to interfere with the premise of the OP, just trying to point out that, IMO at least, there are some valid questions as to which information in this dream can be relied upon and which cannot, especially given the SSM. Keep up the good work!
  12. LynnS, I think this is the SSM you were referring to: In A Dance with Dragons, we learn more about Brandon Stark and his interest in women, similar to Robert's. Did Brandon have any bastards as well? It'd be an exaggeration to say that Brandon died before he could have children. It's established in the books that he was no virgin. He could very well have left behind some little Snows in the various places he visited. But what's absolutely clear is that he had no legitimate children. Also, in that same SSM, GRRM confirms that Brandon had no sons. Hope this helps.
  13. Correct. Willem Darry was not in the KG. Curled Finger - it looks like you failed to mention Selma in your KG split.
  14. I think it is a regional thing specific to the northern clans. I think they use it as a reference to the leader of a family or group. There is a scene in ASOS where Bran comments to Meera and Jojen that there is the Wull, the Norrey, the Knott, and the Liddle. Maybe the clans don't recognize or use royal titles like lord or king. Instead they use "the fill in the blank". Hence, the Mance, instead of Mance Rayder, King Beyond the Wall.
  15. Ravenous, thanks for your response. Much appreciated. The night was 'windless' -- so the only way the leaves could be moving is if Bran is responsible for moving them in a manner independent of natural ambient conditions, i.e. supernaturally! You could think of the animating force as the 'voice' or 'breath' of the greenseer -- a supernatural 'wind'... In TWOW, Theon confirms that the sound effect was not only audible, but that it was accompanied by the visible movement of leaves: When I was originally picturing rustling of leaves I was picturing leaves on the ground being moved, but your quotes make it clearer to me that the rustling leaves are still attached to the tree. So, because Bran is inside the tree, then it makes sense to me that he could move the branches of the tree, and therefore rustle the leaves, because he is, in effect, the tree. But that's not telekenisis. Telekinesis would be moving something, say a rock or sword, with your mind only. I don't think Bran was using telekinesis in either of the book quotes you or I gave. I agree that Bran is likely communicating using the True Tongue, which Ned would not be able to comprehend. But getting back to the point of the OP, Bran being able to speak in the True Tongue does not mean he caused Ned to look at the tree. We don't know if Ned heard anything or not. And if Bran did not make a sound that caused Ned do anything different, then we have no proof that Bran can effect the past.