John Suburbs

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About John Suburbs

  • Rank
    Council Member

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

2,947 profile views
  1. I think it's more of an implication that all the men have risen as wights and walked off, while the horses have not. But this leads to a rather interesting paradox. First, we have never seen a walker actually raising a human wight or controlling one in any way -- not in the prologue with Ser Waymar, not with Otho and Yarwick, the fist, Sam's encounters. All we have is the walker that approached Sam and Grenn on the dead horse, but it's not as if that horse was being directed or controlled any differently than a normal, living horse, nor did it have any mindless compulsion to kill the living. So its interesting that the human wights rose at the fist, but not the horses, and then later we see the only example of a walker with an undead creature: a horse. And is it just me or does the description of that horse match the one that Jon sees at the fist? So that leads to the question, are the walkers really raising the wights? And if not, who is? Might there be a political schism in walker society where one warlord is using some power to reanimate humans, while others are in opposition and maintaining some older custom of only raising animals?
  2. No, there is no proof here, yet. But it is certainly a more plausible explanation than Joffrey killed Bran as an act of mercy, or that in some way Robert would find out it was Joffrey and be oh so proud of him for murdering the helpless child of his best friend in the world.
  3. Yes, Harrenhall, sorry. You appear to be correct, ser. It seems the deal was brokered at Highgarden, not Bitterbridge, which may come as a surprise to many readers and more than a few contributors to the wiki. When Catelyn was there, Renley tells her that Mace is back at Highgarden with 10,000 reserves. And then LF departs for Bitterbridge to convince Loras of the match in the hopes that that will be enough for Mace. Apparently it wasn't, though, so LF had to sail down the Mander to HG in order to close the deal. Lucky they were able to get it all together in time to keep Stannis out of King's Landing. Not really. With Tommen, Cersei remains regent for the next five years, which means she makes all the important decisions like appointments, troop movements, etc. The only influence the Tyrell's would have is to stir up mistrust between Tommen and Cersei, like they were doing in Feast. With Joffrey, Cersei is shipped off to her next husband within a fortnight and Margaery can use all her wiles to influence the decisions Joffrey will try to make, to the almost certain enmity of the real power broker in the capital, Tywin. Or, if Tywin is also scheduled for assassination, then it will be Joffrey alone, because he is certainly not going to want his mother around for very long. Either way, everyone gets what they want virtually overnight with Joffrey (more chaos for LF, more power for the Tyrells), while with Tommen they have to wait at least five more years.
  4. Nasty tempers, powerful wings and long serpentine necks: they sound like the dragons of the bird world.
  5. Yes, exactly. He doesn't have to tell Joff blatantly that it is his job to kill a Stark, but just mention casually that only that level of crisis in House Stark would be enough to prevent Ned from becoming Hand. By this time, LF must know that you never get anywhere with Joff by telling him what to do; you have to entice him into doing things of his own volition. So even if the catspaw is caught and fingers Joffrey, Joff would just deny it and it would be the word of some ragged wretch against the crown prince, and this would suit LF to a T because all the Starks would know it was true but the Lannisters get off scot free. And if somehow word got around that LF was the source of the idea, he can simply claim that he was thinking out loud and he in no way ever intended, or even implied, that Joff should commit murder.
  6. I don't see any hard evidence at all that Rhaegar was either the kidnapper or the kidnapee, nor whether Aerys was involved or not. Fever dreams are intriguing, but they are hardly a substitute for what was really said or what really happened, especially 20 years later when the brain is full of opiates. So sure, Rhaegar might have kidnapped Lyanna just as the histories say, or she may have run away with him willingly, or she might have been taken on the orders of Aerys . . . or . . . both Lyanna and Rhaegar might have been kidnapped, either on Aerys' orders or by the KG themselves. Consequently, Jon might be Rhaegar's son, or Aerys' or one of the KG's or somebody else's entirely. What I do know is that people who say ideas other than their own are crackpot because they have no evidence are being silly. There is no real evidence for anything here.
  7. Sure, but there is no evidence to support that. There is no evidence to support anything. It's all just conjecture at this point.
  8. There is actually very little evidence to support RLJ, but since it would fit thematically within the story it's hard to see how any other conclusion would make sense. All we really know is that Lyanna gave birth, which is likely Jon, and Ned promised to do or not do something (or several things) that came at a great price to him. Jon doesn't appear to have any Targ characteristics, although his eyes appear black, like Dany's, and he is leaner and more graceful than his brothers. But pretty much everyone who sees him notes that he looks more like a Stark than his brothers, with Tyrion going so far as to say that whomever his mother was she left little of herself in Jon (he is, of course, assuming that Ned is his father, not that Lyanna was his mother.) Jon did have one dream with a dragon in it, but this hardly qualifies as dragon-dreaming. And we don't know if he is immune to disease, or even if this is an actual Targ trait (if it is, it most certainly isn't universal). He also doesn't appear to be fire resistant (again, not even certain this is an actual Targ trait either), but then again, Dany had burns on her hands following the fighting pit, so Jon's burns may or may not mean something, or nothing at all. Also, the fact that Jon communes with a wolf (the Stark sigil) and that his particular wolf is white with red eyes, like a weirwood, establish his connection to the North and the First Men pretty clearly. But that may just be a factor of having grown up in the north, perhaps suppressing his Targ heritage. As he gets closer to dragons, we may see more Targness come from Jon.
  9. lol, perhaps not, but I don't see a whole lot of support for any other idea as to why the toughest members of the KG are sitting idle in the middle of nowhere while their prince and king are being slaughtered.
  10. Perhaps Aerys and Rhaegar were working together, or perhaps they were both kidnapped. And perhaps Aerys had nothing to do with it at all -- it was all a plot by the three KG that we are not aware of.
  11. No more crackpot than any other explanation I've seen. Not if he wants to keep her location, and his involvement in the kidnapping, secret. He needs her alive until after the birth to use them in a dragon-hatching ceremony.
  12. LF doesn't care whether Ned comes south or not. That's just the story he gives Joffrey to get him to act. His only goal is to foster hostility between wolf and lion. Joffrey's reaction to Tyrion's mention of the dagger at the breakfast speaks volumes: There is only one VS dagger with a dragonbone hilt in the story, so if Joffrey had no idea what Tyrion was talking about there would have been a puzzled look, not a sharp one, he would be wondering why Tyrion would mention dragonbone at all. Plus, only someone of Joffrey's mentality could come up with a plan so clumsy. Ned came south anyway because it looked like Bran's fall was an accident. If word reach them on the road that he was found murdered in his bed, that might cause Ned to return to Winterfell -- at least to Joffrey's way of thinking. It wasn't just stupid, vicious Joffrey. He was being manipulated by Littlefinger to believe that killing a Stark child was in his best interests.
  13. Not bad. Couple of problems, though. For one, Littlefinger could not possibly think he could get Sansa out of the capital unseen as part of his mission to the Vale. He needs a diversion to do that, and he doesn't even have the poison in place yet. Otherwise, he could have taken her at any time and not even bothered with killing anyone. Secondly, it was Tyrion's idea to offer Joffrey for Margaery. Littlefinger just brokered the deal -- at Bitterbridge, not Highgarden. Highgarden is merely a means to an end, so losing it initially was a setback to his quest for power, but it was not crucial to the plan to remove Sansa from the capital. He could just as easily kept her in the Fingers, or Braavos. As for the rest, this all rests on the fallacy that Lady O thinks Joff is a threat to Margaery, and there is simply nothing to support that contention and ample text that disputes it -- not only Lady O and Margaery's statements but Joff's own behavior toward her. Sansa was beaten for specific reasons and for the history she and Joffrey shared. Margaery has none of this baggage and it is pure fanfic, driven largely by the show, to think that Joffrey just goes around beating highborn ladies at random. Even if he does turn on her, a few black eyes and a bloody lip are well worth the price of the Iron Throne. Many queens, both real and fictional, have endured far worse for their crowns, including Cersei. As I said above, if Joff becomes a problem for Margaery someday, there are ample ways to remove Joffrey without drawing suspicion and without risking the lives of the entire Tyrell family, and by then she will have already produced multiple Tyrell heirs to the IT. And sorry, but nothing short of Margaery's bloody corpse dumped at his feet will spur Loras into the rage he showed after Renley's death, and that is simply not going to happen -- Joffrey just does not up and kill people without reason and without warning. The throne is not unsecured if Joffrey dies after Margaery births an heir. For the Tyrells it is more secured because their own blood is now king, and if he's underage that means Margaery serves as regent and can dismiss all the Lannisters in the capital and their retainers if she wants. There is absolutely no way to conclude that anyone would think King Tommen would be more chaotic than King Joffrey. Tommen is universally considered to be a bright, thoughtful boy while Joffrey is a self-centered idiot. Killing Tyrion before the wedding does not produce the chaos he needs to get Sansa out unseen. There are also plenty of occasions to murder Joffrey through any one of these well-place catspaws. And in order to pin the murder on Joffrey, LF and LO would have to know ahead of time all of the following: that the dwarf joust would produce the desired conflict between them that the conflict would involve the chalice that Tyrion would be named cup-bearer that Tyrion would be handling the chalice just before Joff drinks the poison and that Joff would place the chalice in the exact spot for Garlan to reach it -- not a foot to the left or to the right -- and then walk away to cut the pie. If even one of these utterly unpredictable things fails to happen, then they have no Tyrion to lay the blame -- which leaves the Tyrells as the prime suspects, since they were the ones who provided the chalice and the Martells were nowhere near it the entire time -- and they might not even get the poison into Joffrey.
  14. Perhaps their mission was not to keep her safe, but to sacrifice her and baby on a pyre to hatch a few dragon eggs. The three finest knights in the realm, one of whom is wielding a magic sword, are not going to cower behind a bunch of rocks when confronted by a small band of northern tree-worshipping rabble. And Ned's goodness and honorableness are unknown in the realm at this point.
  15. Because that would blow the cover story that Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna.