I'm not even going to front that.As I said nothing that ive seen with respect to some kind of contact whereby we could even debate if a romance took place.That is a ttangible, or in this case lack of a tangible for me.
Ok I'm typing in the dark here, I can't even see the posts before so bear with me.I think we have to be honest and while debating stay focused and try to do so without bias.Call a spade a spade we will be better off for it. If you say to me there's no romantic connection between Arthur and Lya I agree. I don't see anything whereby we could even begin to debate that other than its possible. This alone is a nail in the coffin for me.
If you tell me you dismiss it because it has no political implications or Ned's reasons need to be X.You lose me.As ive shown in the Arryn murder and i'll drop in Joff's murder things aren't as they appear a lot of time s
I agree with your first point and your other point about creating an uber being.I'm very very glad you said that. My main point is we have no clue because its not stated or implied how Rhaegar was putting this together. Siblings,kids etc.
Wow its amazing how you all twists stuff.Just for accuracy what and who was the subject of the entire thought process Ygrain.Rhaegar was a passing thought.And again in this scenario no one would have known Arthur's role. You all don't seem to realize how GRRM works .Run down the entire Jon Arryn murder again. 1.Who was said to have done it? 2. Who fit the bill seemingly perfectly? 3. Until the day Ned died who did he think did it? 4. Who actually Did it 5.Did his murder have anything to do with 'the secret" for which he found out?
1. Where is it a textually founded opnion,please enlighten me? 2.Yes it is textually based how many pages of this we have in the series now.Robert's anger and rashness is the first to be displayed.That is textuall. Robert's understanding of politics doesn't exclude his foremost rection which in this case would be the same because how would he look at it. Now i was seriously asking why it had to be a reason of politics for Ned when he has again and again demonstrated what honor means to him. The issue is and you all can deny that til the sky burns but Robert would come to the same conclusion about Arthur unless told otherwise....In his mind it would be rape .That's what you are missing.So yes he would go after a rape baby.He may or may not have done anything to the Dornish but he probably would have demonized the KGs because that's what the man does. Serously guys really,......He thinks of Rhaegar???? He thinks of Rhaegar. Aren't you all forgetting something and aren't you all misrepresenting that quote? Lets not resort to this.
JStar,your not telling me anything tangible except what you feel.Its not built on anything but that.You tell me its not about protecting Lyanna's honor because Ned's honor doesn't exist to be sacrificed to protect someone else's.That's an opnion. Voice's point is valid because this isn't just "anyone" its Ned's sister.The fact is Ned's lie accomplishes a lot.It protects his sister's name and honor and it safeguard's Jon's life. I meant no offense by using "you all" i am speaking in general to those of you currently that are participating that hold to this arguement. Again your belief doesn't affect what may or may not be true.You believe that Ned believe's the child would have a stronger claim.That's cool an all but its not the only viable explanation. You already have a conclusion in your head,therefore all alternatives must fit within the parameters of that conclusion instead of looking at the variable that matters. Jstar come on now ,look at the person we are talking about. Why does there have to be political implications.You forgetting who we are dealing with ?Robert is going to focus on one thing and it is not going to be political savy at that point. Why would Robert say anything about Dayne? Rhaegar is the one he believes was responsible for kidnapping Lyanna. What may have happened if this supposed kidnapping took place is what we are debating.Robert and everyone else are likely wrong.They were not there.We have the luxury of looking at te situation throough unbiased eyes and level emotions. Robert,Rhaegar,Ned,Dayne are all dead. Robert can't hurt Jon no matter who his daddy is.Is there relevance to Jon being Arthur's son? Yes the Dayne's are still in the mix and they are tied close to the Starks. As i said before there is a political reason behind making Edric Dayne (the heir to Starfall ) Jon's milkbrother.That is straight out of binding houses that may have been enemies together. Is it possible Arthur could have fathered Jon? Yes
1.Its never made clear or should i say there's some ambiguity about who Rhaegar thought the three were.We know for sure at one point he thought he was TPTWP the Dragon must have three heads yada yada.Which means there were two who would flag him. Then he says its not him and that it was his son Aegon but it was "us" who somehow came to conclusion that what Rhaegar was doing was fathering the 3 heads himself.He could have been,and he may not have been.He could have been trying to put together 3 people with Dragon blood. 2.Who knows what he was praying for or if it mattered or not.
As VOTFM pointed out and its a good point,part of it is about protecting Lyanna's honor no matter who Jon's father is.Lyanna might have cared had she lived.She's dead now and has no care,but Ned would have cared about her name being sullied. The point i raised upthread to Icefire125 is if you all contend that Robert's wrath is the key factor in hiding Jon.If Arthur is Jon's father then that still applies,being as he was supposedly one of the culprits in the supposed kidnapping.Robert would still name that rape unless told otherwise.Any prospect that includes Rhaegar,Arthur or Whent (if he's a thing) has that as an explanation because they were all " part and parcel" in the crime. You see what i'm saying?
I would accurately put in that the Daynes are a focal point period.Not to anyone particular family.Presently,they have their hands in a lot of pots and it comes down to what they stirring. If we go with coventional thinking of how people characterize Robert then Arthur as Jon's father would have the same consequence for Jon.He'd be son of a kidnapper. Howland is the only one left alive and IF per se Arthur was Jon's father and it is revealed now his actions would be more understood by Jon who essentially did the same with Ygritte.Something one would look back on as irony. Explain to me why AD+L=J isn't worth hiding? From a KGs prospective it is especially if you want your name in that white book unsoiled.
We couldn't get anyone to write and essay with this alternative as in no one volunteered doing it,but if you would like to do one that would be awesome.Go for it and when your done you can post it as one of the essays.
To posters again in general,i know its hard to critique without wanting to get a little of one's belief in there,but please try.Can you all look at a work through its own merit objectively,nothing else and have a discussion.We will get so much out of it if we can separate our preconcieved notions and our beliefs from what is before us.Please respect the person that took the time out to do the essay by giving them honest and specific feedback.Critique on the essays own merit. Looking forward to this thanks!!
And to posters again in general,i know its hard to critique without wanting to get a little of one's belief in there,but please try.Can you all look at a work through its own merit objectively,nothing else and have a discussion.We will get so much out of it if we can separate our preconcieved notions and our beliefs from what is before us. Looking forward to this!