J. Stargaryen

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About J. Stargaryen

  • Rank
    Maegor II

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

8,051 profile views
  1. R+L=J v.163

    Why all the secrecy around Jon's parentage? Short answer: “So you say. If you are wrong, we need not fear. If the girl miscarries, we need not fear. If she births a daughter in place of a son, we need not fear. If the babe dies in infancy, we need not fear.” “But if it is a boy?” Robert insisted. “If he lives?” - AGoT, Eddard VIII
  2. I think starting with the Conquest could work well. I don't think the CGI would have to be too crazy, as you'd only need to heavily feature the dragons in a few key scenes; Field of Fire, HH, the Eyrie, for example. 2-3 seasons of the Conquest and Aegon + Visenya + Rhaenys ruling. Then you could have Aegon die, and watch Maegor + old Visenya war with the Faith. Blackfyre, Dark Sister. I'd love to see it. The biggest issue I see with this type of series is that it would be extremely Targaryen centric. It would essentially be Game of Thrones: Fire and Blood. As we are all aware, one of the most appealing aspects of this series is that you have your choice of protagonists. Think the Targs are inbred, entitled assholes—fine. House Stark to the rescue! Unless you're bored by those beleaguered orphans. In that case, House Lannister has your back. Unless you, like show!Renly, think they're the most pompous, ponderous cunts the gods ever... something, something. Think all three of those houses are a bunch of pussies, Ours is the Fury! And if none of them are rapey enough for you, there's always the Greyjoys. I think if they could swing the budget, the Dance would work the best, as it includes other houses in a more substantial way. Maybe they need to wait a few years for the technology to help lower the cost of the CGI. Then we can watch the Targaryens fight fire with fire. Would also love some D&E though. Aerion Brightflame, yo.
  3. Board Issues 4

    Pretty sure I had a post disappear from the end of this thread.
  4. Why did Robert hate the Targaryens so much?

    Aside from Rhaegar kidnapping Lyanna, and Aerys murdering a bunch of Robert's allies, it was probably pretty easy to resent the royal family— the only house above his in the 7K.
  5. Actually, I don't think we necessarily disagree that much about Rhaegar. We both acknowledge that he was likely motivated by some combination of politics, love, and prophecy. We only really differ on the size of the role each part played. I think your theory is reasonable, but I have much less confidence in it than you do. I don't think the available evidence justifies the opening claim that, "There is no doubt... ." On the contrary, Elia's attendance at HH, while pregnant, would seem to run counter to your narrative. Given her difficulty following Rhaenys's birth, I would imagine that any indication of ill health would have prevented her from traveling. This is all possible, of course. But it's also highly speculative. That said, it wouldn't surprise me if at least some of this turned out to be correct. I think there's a decent chance of some interaction with the GoHH. I suppose it's possible that he chose Lyanna at HH as Elia's eventual replacement, and this is what he was signalling when he crowned her. This symbolism does exist, but my guess is that it was meant for the readers, and not the characters. I think I get what you're coming from. However, I'm just saying that the sniffles wouldn't have made her stand out. It was something all the girls who heard Rhaegar play had in common. I think that detail is more significant for the readers than the characters. You kind of make this point yourself, but it's not so much the sniffles as it is all of the other stuff. Sticking up for Howland, being the KotLT. Those are what separate her from the crowd. Nothing wrong with having different opinions.
  6. It's certainly convenient. I'll give myself that much credit. I tend to think they simply wanted to counter-balance the crown's power. But of course such an alliance might naturally result in the type of scenario you suggest. This is another interesting angle. The Mad King was mad, but not necessarily wrong. And perhaps the supposedly honorable Jon Arryn wasn't as innocent and noble as we've been led to believe. Some have even suggested that he was working behind the scenes with Tywin Lannister even prior to the rebellion. I think plans would have changed when Aerys executed Rickard, Brandon, et al., and then called for Ned and Robert's heads. Suddenly instead of a counter-balance to the crown's power, STAB is at war, and fighting for their lives. What is different about the Trident though, is that Rhaegar is leading his father's armies. Maybe STAB had considered the possibility of replacing Aerys with Rhaegar, until the prince joined with his father. It seems unlikely that Robert would have been in favor of this, but cooler heads might have believed it to be an acceptable outcome to the war. At least one!
  7. I don't doubt that he was aware of the possibility. However, I do doubt that he would have made any decisions prior to Aegon's birth. Perhaps, but it's said that all the girls cried when Rhaegar played. I don't think her sniffles would have made her stand out to him. I could see this making sense. Upon realizing Elia could not give him a third child, Rhaegar's thoughts turned to the Northern girl... Brandon wouldn't have to be thinking especially deeply. All that he needs realize in that moment is that Rhaegar is sending a message involving the Starks. My guess is that Brandon knew what his father was up to, and would have understood any intended message. Keep in mind that Lyanna was arguably the linchpin in the STAB alliance, being the only way to unite the Starks and Baratheons by marriage; the only girl out of seven combined children. Brandon and Catelyn both had younger same-sex siblings to replace them if need be. Ned + Lysa would still unite houses Stark and Tully. Fair enough. I think it's a viable theory for sure. Or maybe Rhaegar was acknowledging Lyanna's deeds as the KotLT. I don't think any of the possibilities is the overwhelming favorite at the moment. But for a while now, I've been attracted to the political angle involved in R+L.
  8. I guess it depends on how you look at it, because what Danny and I are saying includes a political element. Are you excluding that element? If not, then we're just arguing over semantics. But in my experience, people opposite myself in these discussion usually are excluding any political motivations for the crowning and/or kidnapping. To be clear, my posts dealt with the kidnapping more, or rather, than the crowning itself. But for the sake of this discussion, I think we can probably lump them together. I think there might be a distinction though, that's worth discussing. I don't think Rhaegar crowned, and/or kidnapped, Lyanna in order to fulfill a prophecy. I think Rhaegar was attempting to solidify his power, as well as that of House Targaryen, against any threats. So that he, or his offspring, could then fulfill the prophecies at a later time. I think that playing at politics with Lyanna Stark caused him, almost by accident, to fulfill the prophecies he had intended for himself and later his children by Elia. So, I don't think he set out to fulfill the prophecies with Lyanna. At least not at first. However, he may have changed his mind later on. Though I am uncertain to what degree. If Brandon had attacked Rhaegar, he would have been arrested or cut down immediately. Remember that six of the seven KG were present. Whether or not Brandon and/or Robert personally feared Rhaegar is irrelevant. This wasn't a matter of a one-on-one battle between the prince and either Brandon or Robert. This was a matter of faction vs. faction. All out civil war. Btw, has it occurred to you that Brandon's reaction is a sign that he received and understood Rhaegar's hypothetical message? Perhaps that was what enraged him so. I completely disagree. If Brandon had attacked Rhaegar, he would have been in the wrong 100%, and all who gathered at HH would have seen it. Hard to sell your rebellion as noble when it was started by a hotheaded fool who broke the law. Not as convincing a piece of propaganda as Rhaegar kidnapping Lyanna, and Aerys murdering Rickard, Brandon, et al. Also, it's entirely possible that if Brandon had attacked Rhaegar that Rhaegar would have defeated him, settling the matter. Or vice versa. No doubt such a confrontation would lead to hard feelings that could eventually lead to rebellion. But a personal beef between two parties, one of them notoriously hotheaded, doesn't guarantee immediate civil war. Right. But what I'm saying is that the theory itself makes sense. We can disagree on how much sense it makes, but I'm not ready to write it off as silly or weak based on the counter arguments I've seen. Well, it might not be as cut and dry as I stated it. Rhaegar may have crowned Lyanna in order to signal that he knew about STAB, and that he planned to stop it. Not that he was necessarily in lock step with his father again. But by indicating that he planned on stopping the STAB bloc, he would have been indicating that he and his father now had a common cause. That STAB would have to deal with the whole of House Targaryen, rather than just mad Aerys at first, and then maybe later Rhaegar + Dorne. You know, it's possible that STAB intended to allow Rhaegar to eventually become king. But by that time he might have been left with half a kingdom, and/or known as the Toothless Dragon. Recall Aegon V's difficulty in ruling the 7K. Surely Rhaegar would have even less power and success had STAB been allowed to continue to grow.
  9. As I mentioned, I especially liked the point about what actually happened after RR ended. Namely, that the rebels did not disband the 7K. In fact, keeping them together seemed to be a top priority, as evidenced by Jon Arryn's urging Robert to marry Cersei. I don't think it has to be that he was more focused on politics than prophecy. In fact, one of the arguments I made somewhere along the way in those discussions I linked, was that Rhaegar could have been motivated by prophecy to play at politics. Keeping in mind all you say, Robert and Brandon have more to fear from Rhaegar than vice versa. He's still a Targaryen prince, which places him above them in the kingdom's pecking order. Simply crowning Lyanna isn't enough to start a rebellion. Relatively minor insults from the royal family, including the kind of message sending we're discussing, had to be tolerated by non royals. You're not going to get half of the kingdom to risk literally everything because a handful of lords were insulted, without injury. Also, if you look back at the actual rebellion it becomes clear that even a united STAB was a long shot to overthrow the Targaryens. The rebels were on the brink of losing the war for almost its entire duration, despite only one indecisive loss in the field. On the other hand, the Targaryens were one victory at the Trident away from putting down the rebellion, despite losing battle after battle to them. Rhaegar went to the Trident with the larger army. Again, after losing several battles, and indecisively winning only once. The rebels had to walk a tightrope in order to win, which they did. If Hoster Tully backs out of STAB, the rebels lose. If Storm's End falls, the rebels lose. If Robert dies in battle at any time, the rebels almost surely lose. And as we know, he was injured on at least a couple of occasions. I don't really agree. Especially if you follow @SFDanny's line of thinking. Which is, that Rhaegar was sending a message to STAB that he and his father were united. Because, as I stated above, even a united STAB still had to fear the might of the Targaryens. They no longer had dragons, but they had enough loyal houses to keep them in power. I think the crowning can be political, prophecy related, and for love. Depending on how you look at it. For example, I think the symbolism of Rhaegar using his lance to place the crown in Lyanna's lap is, for the readers, undoubtedly sexual. It's meant to symbolize Rhaegar impregnating Lyanna with Jon. But was that Rhaegar's intent when he crowned her? I highly doubt it. In universe I think there is a fair chance that it was a political statement. I kind of touched upon it above, but my feeling is that Rhaegar was motivated by prophecy to play at politics, which led to his relationship with Lyanna. I agree that there is a tendency for us to overthink certain issues here. But it's hard to blame us since the last book came out in 2011. No worries.
  10. Thanks. That's rather kind of you. I certainly wasn't implying that you were claiming credit for what is a rather minor contribution in the grand scheme of things. One invented for the sake of convenience. (Sort of like my naming Bael the Bard's Stark girl Baelette, which I've seen used here and there.) Nor was I implying any ill intent on the part of @TheSeason. No harm, no foul. Just a simple misunderstanding. Perhaps I came off as clamoring for attention, but that wasn't my intention either. "STAB" belongs to the community—that's what we're here for, to share our ideas—but if credit is going to be given, it ought to be given where it's due. Indeed, you are misinterpreting my post. I was simply trying to add a bit to the discussion. It's easier to post links than re-type what is already written.
  11. The "STAB" acronym was my invention, but I'm glad to see it has caught on. TABS and BATS work too, but not quite as well, especially the former. Though the latter has the benefit of a coincidental connection to HH, where the reigning lords featured a bat on their sigil. I like a lot of @SFDanny's thoughts in this thread. However, I disagree that STAB intended to dissolve the Seven Kingdoms into seven kingdoms. And I think @Macgregor of the North provided a strong argument against Danny's case here, by pointing out that STAB kept the 7K united after winning the rebellion. Of course, it's possible that things had changed, and Danny's arguments do make sense. My guess is that STAB intended to keep the Targaryens on the IT as nominal kings. The Targaryens wouldn't be able to push around that alliance, especially if/when they added the Lannisters to the fold. In fact, it might have been quite the opposite. By maintaining nominal Targaryen rule, STAB(+L) probably would have been able to exert influence over Dorne, the Iron Islands and the Reach via the Targaryen monarch. It would be one thing for those three kingdoms to refuse a demand from a separate kingdom, but it's reason to refuse an order from their king. So, while STAB(+L) could gain a certain amount of independence from dissolving the 7K, they probably would wield a great deal more power by keeping them together, and ruling them all from the shadows. @Rippounet and I had both separately come to the conclusion that Rhaegar's motivation for kidnapping Lyanna may have been political. With many of the same ideas and themes that have been discussed in this thread. Here is the Link to my original posts on this topic, and here is the Link to Rippounet's. I thought those posts and discussions might be of some interest to the participants of this thread.
  12. R+L=J v.163

    This is only required to fit into your interpretation of events. For example, it doesn't take a lot of imagination to suppose that Rhaegar arranged Lyanna's post-tourney stay at HH, and work from there. That kind of deception would account for treachery. But still, that's assuming we even need to account for that, which isn't a certainty. Just one of your parameters. Except that RLJ already provides a pretty good explanation for how they work. Are you saying it's a coincidence that you went looking for something extra, when that "something extra" is a requirement of AD+L=J? Lol. Fine. But the point I was making was, yours was not a natural conclusion. You had to go looking for it in order to "find" it. So, you had a conclusion in mind, which required a certain type of explanation— one that de-emphasized the connection between Rhaegar and the blue roses. Lo and behold, "treachery." This right here. How is this cleaner than the RLJ explanation I provided?
  13. R+L=J v.163

    I added @Kingmonkey's essay to the OP. It's near the top with the other essays and the Radio Westeros podcast. There was some discussion of an accompanying description, but I wasn't sure if that had been decided upon or not, so I just left it bare bones for now. --- As for GRRM always associating blue roses and treachery, RLJ already allows for that in multiple ways, not to mention secrecy, bitterness, heartbreak, forbidden love, etc. For example, Rhaegar running off with Lyanna is certainly a breach of trust since she was betrothed to Robert. To be clear, this entire angle of @Sly Wren's exists as a way to explain Rhaegar giving Lyanna the blue roses, but Arthur fathering her baby. That is, this isn't a natural conclusion. This is the fruit of someone who went looking for an alternative explanation to fit with a preconceived idea. But I just don't know how we can work around the fact that GRRM connects roses with Lyanna's birthing bed. I was with her when she died,” Ned reminded the king. “She wanted to come home, to rest beside Brandon and Father.” He could hear her still at times. Promise me, she had cried, in a room that smelled of blood and roses. Promise me, Ned. The fever had taken her strength and her voice had been faint as a whisper, but when he gave her his word, the fear had gone out of his sister’s eyes. Ned remembered the way she had smiled then, how tightly her fingers had clutched his as she gave up her hold on life, the rose petals spilling from her palm, dead and black. After that he remembered nothing. They had found him still holding her body, silent with grief. The little crannogman, Howland Reed, had taken her hand from his. Ned could recall none of it. “I bring her flowers when I can,” he said. “Lyanna was… fond of flowers. - Eddard I So, "blood and roses" equals bed of blood/bloody bed and blue winter roses. Though the roses here aren't blue, they don't need to be, as no other colored roses are connected to Lyanna. That, and the fact that Ned's ToJ dream includes Lyanna and blue rose petals. Interestingly, the "blood and roses" Ned describes here are the colors red and black, Targaryen colors. IMO, if you know the text well enough, the phrase "blood and roses" is enough to tell you who Jon's parents are. Because it means that Lyanna gave birth, and points to a specific man, Rhaegar Targaryen. Because only Rhaegar gave her roses.
  14. Was Lyanna Stark the Knight of the Laughing Tree?

    I'm not so sure. And even if we assume you're correct, that doesn't detract from the Lyanna-Daena parallels. - Lyanna liked playing with swords. Not exactly lady like. So the Lyanna-Daena parallel is at least as strong. - Sure, but Lyanna might have done the same after her abduction, or on her way to meet Rhaegar. - Except Cersei didn't raise her children as bastards. She passed them off as Robert's children. Whereas Daena openly acknowledged her son's bastardy. Their characters intersect in certain ways. In any case, a large part of your problem with Lyanna as the KotLT, and its evidence re: practicing at jousting, was the lack of a parallel. Since one has been found, I'm curious to know what you make of it now.
  15. Was Lyanna Stark the Knight of the Laughing Tree?

    Any comment on this, @Sly Wren?