bent branch

Members
  • Content count

    1,278
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About bent branch

Profile Information

  • Gender Female

Recent Profile Visitors

684 profile views
  1. Was there any foreshadowing for Aegon living?

    Actually, there is someone still alive who was there. Believe it or not, Thoros was there. I was looking up something entirely different about Thoros when I found the text where Thoros says he was in the throne room when the children's bodies were brought to Robert. Blew me away! This is not a rumor from someone else, but Thoros saying it himself.
  2. What is the best POV story arc in any of the novels?

    What makes you think a character needs to change to have a story arc? Have you never heard of Bartleby the Scrivener? I could tell you about him, but I would prefer not to. 
  3. Can you answer these questions about TOJ?

    1. The battle occurred as Ned tried to leave with Jon, not as he tried to enter the tower. If I were to say to you that there were zombies in front of my house, you would have no idea where I was since I have only reported the position of the zombies. Similarly, we are only told the location of the KG (in front of the tower), not where Ned is. 2. Jon could be a couple of months old or a little younger. However, the KG were undoubtedly following orders. If their orders included Lyanna (which they almost certainly did), they would have been unable to leave until Lyanna either got better or died. Their orders probably didn't allow for them to choose who they were going to stay with, Lyanna or Jon. 3. Agreed there was at least one servant at ToJ. If this servant was Wylla, there really didn't need to be more than just the one. However there could have been more. 4. When Ned was allowed in to see Lyanna, she made him promise to take Jon back to Winterfell with him, rather than allowing the KG to take Jon into exile (at least that is what I think happened). So Lyanna's request led to a fight that otherwise would probably not have happened.
  4. What is the best POV story arc in any of the novels?

    Theon in Dance then Jaime in Feast, then Catelyn in Storm. ETA: Hell, I may as well say who my favorite POVs are in AGOT (Eddard) and ACOK (Tyrion).
  5. Varys's Backstory: What Are the Readers Expected to Believe?

    The paranoia about Varys is hilarious. GRRM said Varys was the second most misunderstood character in the series. We'll see how many of these fears about Varys come true.
  6. Varys's Backstory: What Are the Readers Expected to Believe?

    Of course Varys is disguised here. Varys would need an explanation of why he was in the dungeons if he was seen by someone. Rugen doesn't need any excuse. ETA: Varys is a eunuch. There is no reason to believe otherwise.
  7. So Tyrion interprets the vision to mean that he will be in the thick of things, that he will be important. So GRRM thinks this is a reasonable conclusion to draw, so I don't think I'm off base even if we disagree. Also, I had gone back even further in the quote the first time I quoted it so it was perfectly acceptable for me to provide only the portion of the quote we were discussing. (As an aside, does your version of the book show "it all."? Because my version just shows all-this is just a curious question.) As for Aegon being the bright dragon we already see that happening. Aegon is going to be hailed as the savior of Westeros. The vision from the HotU reveals this. And this will happen whether Aegon is Rhaegar's son or not. It doesn't bother me at all that I can't place a name in that vacant spot. To be bothered by that would be the same as being bothered by an unknown variable in an algebra equation. In algebra you solve the equation to figure out the unknown value. Similarly I am using the known variables to help me figure out the unknown variable. And I should thank you, because in this discussion I have realized something about the matrix. In the first two pairings, Aemon/Jon and Dany/Viserys there are two dragons where one dragon is nurturing and teaching the other. Also in both pairings the "teacher" has died and the "student" continues on. I know at this point someone will say Viserys was terrible to Dany (and that is true), but he was also the one who kept her alive between the ages of 5 and 13. And we also know he had to be the one to teach Dany to read and write (because of their peripatetic lifestyle). This means the missing dragon probably also provided nurturing and guidance to Aegon (be he real or fake). This is most probably Illyrio since we know Aegon lived in Illyrio's manse, that Illyrio funded Aegon's life and lessons, and there is about a 90% chance that Illyrio is the descendent of Aegor Rivers and Calla Blackfyre, thus a Blackfyre of female line. This would also make Illyrio the "owner" of the GC, thus his comment about some contracts being written in blood.
  8. I ended up in the conversation because I noticed that the OP came up with seven Targs from the beginning of the story. I found this interesting because Moqorro's vision would suggest that there are seven Targs in the story. You think there are eight or more. Okay. The exact quote is, "A small man with a big shadow, snarling in the midst of all." I think it means Tyrion will be in the thick of the action. You think it means Tyrion will meet all of the dragons mentioned. Gotcha. Once upon a time I too believed that. My problem with that is that I have thrown every combination of "dragon" into the matrix and the one that came out making the most sense was: Aemon/Old-Jon/Young; Dany/True-Viserys/False-Aegon/Bright-?/Dark. Does it bother me that I have failed to persuade someone who uses the term fAegon? No.  
  9. Go back and read the scene again. Moqorro is looking into the flames and Tyrion goes up and asks him what he sees. Moqorro answers dragons, not "why you, dude!"
  10. You place Aegon in the false position because you believe that it will be a future event that makes Aegon false. You believe this even though we know that any important event involving Aemon must have occurred in the past. Despite the evidence within the vision itself that the importance of these dragons can come from the past or the future, you continue to insist that the false dragon cannot be Viserys because he is dead. Viserys' actions in past helped lead to the birth of the dragons. I will ask you the same thing I asked King Viserys. How does Tyrion just meeting Aemon effect the course of future events? You are interpreting Moqorro's vision as if it was about Tyrion and there is no evidence it was.
  11. So basically, your answer is yes. You think that to put in Aegon is any other position in the matrix is to conclude he is real. The answer as to Tyrion being one of them is that the "dragons" mentioned all have something to do with how these event will play out. Viserys was important to this series of events because he was one of the things that pushed Dany into hatching the dragons. Hell, even his death was one of a series of events that led up to the hatching of the dragons. So, Viserys was a dragon that had a direct effect on current events. How does Tyrion meeting Aemon effect future events. Unless you are one of those people that think Aemon's pickled body is going to be taken to Dany and Moqorro will revive it (wow, when I say it like that it sounds pretty cool), then what importance is Tyrion just meeting Aemon? How does that change the course of events?
  12. The question I have for both of you is why do place Aegon in the false position? Is it because you think if you place him in any other position he has to be the son of Rhaegar and Elia? I assure you that Aegon being placed in one of the other positions in the matrix doesn't automatically mean he is or is not the son of Rhaegar and Elia. At this point the only Targ in the story that has been called a false dragon is Viserys. As far as Viserys in relation to Tyrion, Moqorro's vision was NOT about Tyrion. At no point are we told that it was. Moqorro was looking into the fire and Tyrion asks him what he sees. Moqorro responds dragons. He then mentions six paired dragons and Tyrion. One way Tyrion be amongst these dragons is by meeting them all (although we know these dragons cannot be together at the same time since Aemon is dead). Another way that Tyrion can be amongst these dragons is by being one of them. It is an assumption that the visions are about the future (they cannot be because Aemon is dead). It is also an assumption that Tyrion will interact with each of these dragons.
  13. Is including Viserys a logical flaw? Consider what we know about Viserys. Viserys was no true dragon or in other words a false dragon. So there in one thing in favor of Viserys being the false dragon. Also, Aemon and Jon were two dragons who were together and the old and young dragon were paired. The only dragon that Dany has personally known up to this time is Viserys. This is another argument in favor of Viserys being the false dragon since Dany is paired with the false dragon. Now we know that Aemon was dead when Moqorro saw his vision, so obviously he was not strictly seeing the future or even the present, but also seeing the past. So there is a third argument in Viserys being the false dragon. But say that it is not Viserys as the false dragon, then we are already up to a minimum eight dragons in the story. You and I have discussed before what is logical and what is not logical. At one point you told me that you believed Aegon was a fake because you believed in the wisdom of the masses. At the same time I know you are a big supporter of A+J=T, an extremely unpopular theory. This leads me to believe that your logic is whatever you need it to be to get whatever answer you want.  
  14. Aemon is ALSO dead by the time Moqorro has his vision. You are assuming that the way it is worded means that Tyrion must meet all of the said dragons. However, the way it is worded could also mean that Tyrion IS one of the said dragons. The mistake you are making is assuming that putting Aegon in the false position doesn't affect how the all the other positions should be read. This is a very basic mistake in logic, but lots of people seem to make it.
  15. In general I agree with you in what constitutes a "dragon" (Targaryens, their bastards and Blackfyres). However, in placing Aegon in the false dragon slot, it would mean that there are more than seven dragons in the story. I have explained in the past, in detail, why this is. However, the bull-headed insistence that Aegon is fAegon means people can't see the flaw in placing Aegon in the false position. Logic demands that if Aegon is placed in the false position there are more Targaryens in the story, but people will always throw logic out the window if it threatens one of their cherished theories.