Pigeon Pie

Members
  • Content count

    692
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Pigeon Pie

  • Rank
    Noble
  • Birthday 04/06/1995

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Interests
    Reading, writing, filmmaking, watching TV and film, daydreaming.

Recent Profile Visitors

535 profile views
  1. This is another theory that I thought of after watching episode 6, but since it pertains to general things and the future of the show as well, I decided to put it here. The theory is copied from my tumblr where I wrote it first. I hope you enjoy. SPOILERS OF THE SHOW AND BOOKS SO FAR. GO AHEAD AT YOUR OWN RISK. (The title of the theory is originally "ice dragon" not "white dragon" but I replaced it in case this is considered a spoiler for... you know what) A few things before I start… 1. All credits go to @nobodysuspectsthebutterfly and @joannalannister for coming up with the theory that Jon will ride Viserion. It’s a really interesting and convincing theory that you can read here. This theory is just a buildup on that theory in light of the recent development in which Viserion turned into a wight. 2. For reasons that I will clarify, I think that this theory doesn’t just go for the show, but for the books as well. 1. The Ice Dragon. (or, how does this theory play out in the books?) Well, in the books, we have too many references to an ice dragon for it to be a coincidence. For instance, there’s a constellation actually named the Ice Dragon. It is mentioned on many occasions, especially in POVs of northern characters. An Ice Dragon also plays into the stories of Old Nan (the majority of which we know shed some light on events from the past and foreshadow the possible future. Not only that, but some characters also happen to think of ice dragons a lot, making a lot of similes related to ice dragons. In particular, Jon. Isn’t an ice dragon a strange thing to constantly be in the subconscious of the people like that? That’s like naming a constellation The Swimming Bird, or The Vegetarian Lion. It’s a strange contradiction; a paradox. To me, the phrase “ice dragon” is comparable to a “blue flower grew from a chunk in a wall of ice”… it’s not something that sounds regular in the flow of speech; it’s put there for a purpose. Why would such a thing be constantly suggested if it’s not foreshadowing something in the future? Some have theorized that said ice dragon is actually the wall itself. Personally, I find that interesting, but logistically challenging and difficult to take place. If the entire wall was a dragon, that thing would be hopeless to defeat. It would be hundreds of times the size of Balerion himself. What I personally think is that it’s inevitable that one of Daenerys’ dragons will meet its demise in the books; it’s just inevitable plot-wise. No one and nothing is unbeatable, and to show us that, George will have to take out some people and creatures that we thought of as higher-than-life, i.e. the dragons. Yes, this is one of the cases (like R+L=J, or the wall eventually coming down) where I think the showmakers stuck to the scenario that they know will happen in the books. A dragon will eventually be killed in the books, and my money’s on Viserion (for reasons that will become clear later, but even now, I feel like just changing the dragon that dies from Viserion to Rhaegal isn’t a change that the showmakers would make. It doesn’t make that big of a difference for them.) However, because of the whole “three heads of the dragon” thing, I personally don’t believe that said dragon will stay dead. I believe it will be turned into the “dark side” either by Euron (who now serves the others) using the Horn of Joramun, or the Night King himself, therefore becoming the Ice Dragon; a dragon that, if not literally made of ice, it fights on the side of ice, thus going against what it inherently is: A dragon; fire-made flesh. 2. Fire-Made Flesh From the very beginning, the magical aspect of the story revolved around the conflict between two magical forces in the universe: Ice and Fire. One of them is portrayed as inherently bad (ice) and the other is portrayed as potentially good, but also volatile and can be quite destructive depending on who’s in control of it (fire.) And this makes sense; ice brings the cold and death and nothing else (please don’t leave me replies about refrigerators) but fire can bring warmth and safety (if you think about it in a more primal sense that makes sense in ASOIAF, you can use fire to scare away predators) but needless to say, fire can also be highly destructive. When it comes to dragons vs. white walkers, each of them belongs exclusively to one of those two forces. Dragons are described as “fire-made flesh”; they are able, against all laws of physics, to breathe fire. And allegedly, fire cannot kill a dragon. White walkers bring the cold, frost, death, and they reanimate the dead to do their bidding; however, the only thing that kills them is fire. So, we see that each of the two factors does something exclusive to it and magical; fire magic, and ice magic. Now; the question is: Can a dragon turn into an undead being animated by ice magic? Wouldn’t that be inherently against its nature? Again, like previously expressed in the previous point, an “ice dragon” is a paradox. It’s the same thing as an other that breathes fire. And yes, you can kill a dragon and turn it into a wight, technically, and you can’t make an other breathe fire, but because of how that state is contradictory to the dragon’s very existence… would it be a complete state? The reason why the wights are what they are is because they’re unintelligent. They lose their mind, personality, sense, and become nothing but zombies animated by ice. But a dragon… does it get to keep its intelligence as a wight and serve (whoever) as an independent force that decides what to do? Yes it changes “side”, but does it completely lose its conscious? Personally, I believe that a dragon can never fully become what a wight is. It will never only obey the Night King, especially not above its chosen rider. Because before being a wight, it is first and foremost a dragon. So, for the time being, I want you not to think of Viserion as an undead wight that has no control of what it’s doing, but as an Other!dragon; a monster moved by ice that still has a will and intelligence, and that still gets to choose who its rider will be. And I believe that, because Viserion still has his free will, this rider can be a living human. For the time being, Viserion will do the night king’s bidding, perhaps destroying the wall and killing a bunch of people… until he finds his true rider. 3. The Wolf So… what would make a person Viserion’s chosen rider? Let’s ask this question in another way. If being the prince that was promised was simply the matter of being the third child of Rhaegar Targaryen, why would he have it by way of running away with the daughter of a paramount lord who’s also the fiancee of another paramount lord, while he himself is married with two children, plunging the realm into war? He could have had a third child with a washerwoman or servant girl on Dragonstone. Or, if he’s super elitist and picky, he could have had it with a noblewoman from a lesser house who’s not engaged. He’s the crown prince, and noblemen in Westeros had their flings and no one held it against them (even when it became excessive, like in the cases of Brandon or Robert.) So… why Lyanna? Is there anything special about Stark blood that gives its holder certain power? Why must there always be a Stark in Winterfell? Why don’t we ever hear that there must always be a Lannister in Casterly Rock, or an Arryn in the Eyrie? Is it just family tradition, or the sealing of a protective spell? Old Nan says that the first Night King (a legendary figure that has no relation to the current night king, but we don’t know if it’s truly legendary or if it’s one of *those* legends) was a Stark of Winterfell. We know the wall itself was built by a Stark of Winterfell (and not just any Stark, he founded the house.) Most (if not all) of the current generation of Starks are wargs; warging, skinchanging etc. seem to be magical abilities that come from the children of the forest… the children created the Others and lost control of their creation, and tried to destroy them (something not confirmed in the books yet.) But again… why were those abilities granted mostly to Starks? (they show up in Euron who is Ironborn and Brynden Rivers/Three Eyed Raven whose mother was from the Riverlands though from a house descended from the First Men… but again, most of those who possess those powers happen to be Starks.) There is definitely a tie between the Starks and the Others. We don’t know the nature of this tie, whether the others were originally Starks/some of them were Starks, whether there was a pact between the Starks and the Others to keep them away from Westeros that was sealed with blood magic (i.e. the magic wardings on the Wall; probably sealed with Bran the Builder’s blood) and though we don’t know what this tie is, it definitely exists. Ice magic (to a lesser degree) has a relation to the Starks. And while I don’t think they can reanimate the dead any more than the Targaryens can breathe fire, having such a relation to a potent type of magic definitely affects you and makes you capable of connecting to it. So, back to Jon Snow… (or did we ever start talking about him?) Jon has the magical formula of balance between ice and fire. He has the blood of the kings of winter, of Bran the Builder, of the first men, and the blood of the dragonlords of Valyria. He has the potential to ride a dragon, and the potential to have a link to the others that enables him to make peace with them. And with… an intelligent wight? But making peace with the others isn’t what we’re discussing here… what we’re discussing is the fact that Jon has ice magic AND fire magic in his blood. Jon is undead; a “wight animated by fire” as Martin has said recently. And Viserion is undead; a dragon animated by ice. They are both ice dragons; one figurative, the other literal. Add to this all the evidence in the theory by joannalannister and nobodysuspectsthebutterfly that was linked above, and Jon is the perfect rider for Viserion. 4. Conclusion ِAs much as you can never freeze fire, you can never turn a dragon into a wight and expect it to be completely in service of The Great Other. The two things are as paradoxical as ice and fire themselves. And if a living human being in the ASOIAF universe has the potential to tame an ice dragon and ride it, it can only be Jon Snow; a figurative ice dragon himself, who has magical ties to the others and magical ties to the dragons.
  2. ^^^all of this.
  3. You never hear any "bitching" over that because it never actually happened lol, it was just something that Renly was plotting and never actually saw the light. (Oh and by the way, isn't this a book-only thing? Isn't this the forum where we discuss the show? And this post is about show!Rhaegar, so your point about comparing show!Rhaegar's actions to something that never even took place in the books is invalid? I'm just saying) Yeah, let me try to imagine how Elia, the daughter of a great house, felt being set aside by her husband (and thereby humiliated in front of the entire country) basically telling everyone that she isn't good enough to be his wife anymore because she isn't as healthy as Lyanna Stark, after she had risked her life to secure him a male heir, with the very real possibility that said male heir and his sister could become bastards now, and they're all left on an island that is too close for comfort to her husband's crazy father who thinks they're all conspiring against him. I'm sure she felt positively? You? And Rhaegar married Lyanna in Dorne because Dorne could provide the most remote and secure location, i.e. a tower in the middle of the desert, not because Elia's family was soooo welcoming of a decision that humiliates them and their daughter. And Arthur would have gone with Rhaegar anywhere, he's the KG in charge of guarding him. (and btw, I'm not the only one "bitching", anyone who doesn't just eat up every stupid decision that the showmakers make and accepts it as entirely logically possible has been angry about this decision, including Elio and Linda, see the link I posted above)
  4. In the books, it's definitely something from a scroll he read, and some even theorize that he met the Ghost of High Heart herself. On the show, there's no mention of the prophecy and Rhaegar's knowledge of it at all, so show!Rhaegar's actions seem to be purely motivated by love for Lyanna Stark. He probably had no intention of siring the Prince that Was Promised at all, dude just wanted to get laid.
  5. If Elia had agreed to that annulment, why would she stay on Dragonstone where she's in much more danger, when she could have been secretly transported back to Dorne where she will be in the safety of her own home? Not to mention that that was such a massive insult to Elia and House Martell that she would never agree to such a thing. If I married someone (even if it were someone I wasn't in love with) and risked my own life and safety to give him children and then he came and told me that he'll divorce me because I was no longer good enough because I can't deliver a third child/I'm not from a certain family, I'd be livid. He may have told her about it, but she had no option but to not contest it. Doesn't mean she agrees. People seem to think that annulment is a simple matter and that it's just like a modern divorce. It isn't. Elio and Linda just made a video about it that I invite all of you to watch. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZTfVpNnRQo
  6. I'm glad you changed your mind! Yes, the showmakers are trying to merge Jon and Aegon, but an important part of Aegon's dynamic is that he (99.9%) is an impostor. Jon, on the other hand, has been legitimized in the show (no matter how little sense it makes) and if they're trying to set it up so that he is now the legal heir to the Iron Throne, I don't know where they're trying to go with this, because his claim means NOTHING in comparison to Dany's not because of who's whose son, but because he doesn't have the dragons, the dothraki or the unsullied. The Iron Throne has NEVER been a part of Jon's struggle. He has never even contemplated sitting it. His ambition never went there at all, all we ever hear is that he wished he were a legitimate Stark of Winterfell and that he could have a claim to Winterfell, the home of the only father he ever knew. Dany on the other hand has struggled for the Iron Throne, she has fought for it. It has been her endgame since the beginning of the story. To all of a sudden erase that, to say that Dany's struggle doesn't matter (because oops your brother had a secret son, so now your six-season-long story means nothing, sorry kid) and that Jon's struggle (with bastardy) is now invalid too, and now he has a new thing to fight for, is extremely bad writing. Also this idea that "Jon will be a better king because he doesn't want to be the king" sounds admirable... in a Utopia or something. This is never the reality of things. Aegon the conqueror wanted to be the king of Westeros, and he united Westeros and gave it years of peace and prosperity. Robert Baratheon didn't want to be the king, he just wanted Lyanna back, and he was a terrible king (the only reason that the realm didn't plunge into chaos under him was Jon Arryn.) So, this idea that if you don't have ambition that makes you better at the job than the person who has the ambition, is simply ridiculous.
  7. TBH Where the show is headed is not where I wanted LF to die at all. I imagined a more epic death for him, like Dany burning him with the dragons in the Eyrie a la Harren in Harrenhal (what with the parallels between both, both of them being designed to be "impregnable" etc)
  8. All the information about the children of an annulled marriage and annulment and its possible grounds have been drawn from 1. A Wiki of Ice and Fire 2. The similarities between The Faith of the Seven and Catholicism, especially that there are no previous cases by which we can judge the situation (and really, the fact that no Targaryen ruler before has been capable of doing this no much how big a rift between him and his wife there was, that fact alone should tell people how stupid this whole annulment situation is.)
  9. This doesn't make sense. If Rhaegar believed that any third child of his would make do as the third head of the dragon, why not just have it with any common girl, thus resulting in no political repercussions that would destroy his family? The justification that "Oh he just loved Lyanna" makes him a POS. This is the only description fit for a man who endangered his family like that just because he loved a girl who wasn't his wife. Like, sorry dude, you fell in love but also if you pursue that love you're going to cause a civil war which could result in the death of your entire family. The choice should be obvious. It would be nice if there was, but it is not needed really, Melissandre can tells us about the prophecy. That's not to say, Rhaegar did more than read books about prophecy day and night, Barristan himself says some things he used to do, and this is enough for the viewer to have an idea of how he was and why men followed him into battle. This is not important for the show, but in the History and Lore of Westeros(those extras that comes with the Blu-Ray), it is mentioned in the video about the Knight of the Laughing Tree that Rhaegar arranged the tourney to take Aerys from the throne. The show has wasted time on many things that have no importance whatsoever. You would think the prophecy that constitutes the title of the series and the person who worked towards fulfilling it deserve an honorable mention, especially when the actions of said person towards fulfilling it are so crucial to the main story. I understand what you're saying about the political part, but from the annulment the decision itself, it appears that the show isn't just being hush-hush about Rhaegar's politics, but deliberately making him a political dumb*ss. That's definitely not a good enough justification according to the faith, especially that Elia had already delivered not just an heir, but also a daughter AKA everything that was required of her as the wife of the crown prince. The only justifications according to the faith are 1. If the marriage was not consummated and the parties involved/one of them wants out 2. If one of the two parties was forced into the marriage. He doesn't get a gold star for not killing his wife. Also if he had gotten her pregnant anyway, the baby itself could have died, thus not delivering a third head of the dragon at all. The examples where the children were not bastardized are few compared to the other ones, though, and it's still pretty risky business. Even if Aegon had remained legitimate and Rhaegar's rightful heir, who's to say that his mother being set aside won't still cause some to feel like he isn't the rightful king in the future, especially with the fact that many Westerosi are racist against Dornishmen and will feel that the white, "more Westerosi" Starks are better consorts. Civil wars have broken in the history of the Targaryens for less. This situation would be way too similar to that of Aegon the Unworthy. I don't think any Targaryen king, including Rhaegar, would want to be remembered for that. Again, Elia's health is NOT a good reason in the books, nor should it have been on the show, for annulment. If this were the case, we'd hear about many more annulments in Targaryen Kings' history. The only annulment we ever heard of was that of Baelor the Blessed, and it was possible only because the marriage is unconsummated. Like I already mentioned, it's much more likely that Aegon would be bastardized by the annulment than not. Not a single great house in Westeros would take something like annulment lightly. I mean, Tywin was so insulted by Aerys just declining to marry Cersei to Rhaegar that he resigned as hand of the king, let alone someone take a PRINCESS OF DORNE as his wife, then set her aside after she had done her duty and given him two children, one of them a healthy male heir. I think you're the only thinking too lightly of annulment. An annulment is NOT a divorce. It's not a simple "Sorry, we just didn't get along so it had to end," it's unmaking a marriage as if it never happened. What basically happened here is that show!Rhaegar took the daughter of a great house that had held on to its sovereignty for a long time, used her to produce heirs, then deemed her unsatisfactory when she could no longer deliver more, and decided to erase her from his life and isolate her and her family politically. It's a slap in the face. Well, what other options does Rhaegar have to obtain a third child? If the child being of Stark blood is not of paramount importance (which I think it is) like I said he could have had it on any servant girl in Dragonstone with zero repercussions. There's no mention anywhere that the child has to be a legitimate Targaryen to be a third head of the dragon (heck, I don't think it needs to have Targaryen blood at all) and therefore Rhaegar didn't even have to marry Lyanna or annul his marriage to Elia at all. This is just the show's poor writing and turning Rhaegar from a person who cared about the world's fate and tried to save it by fulfilling a prophecy, to a love struck idiot who abandoned his family to marry a sixteen year old girl, all because they wanted Jon to have a legitimate claim to the throne.
  10. True. And I agree with the Aemon thing; Aemon was the only good man from Rhaegar's family that he knew. If he were to have a second boy, I think he'd like to name him Aemon.
  11. Why are people now speculating that Elia was cheating? This is pure speculation that there is zero evidence for, conjured up just to whitewash show!Rhaegar and blame the victim of this situation, Elia. Elia is a victim of bad writing that turned her husband into an insensitive oaf and show!Rhaegar doesn't deserve to be defended or for people to bend over backwards trying to find an excuse for him. (And this actually comes from someone who's a huge fan of Rhaegar, only now I know the one I like is the one from the books, not the show)
  12. Or, How Game of Thrones Bastardized Rhaegar to Unbastardize Jon. I wrote this short study of show!Rhaegar on my tumblr today, I hope you enjoy reading it. It contains spoilers of both the books and the show so far. (AND BEFORE REPLYING PLEASE CHECK THIS OUT, IT'S JUST TWEETS THEY'LL TAKE A MINUTE BUT YOU NEED TO SEE THEM) So, now that I can finally access the internet from my computer for an unlimited amount of time, I wanted to write down what you’re meant to make of show!Rhaegar, why he annulled his marriage to Elia (even though that shouldn’t even be possible) and how close he is to being book!Rhaegar. And while we’re at it, let me tell you all the reasons why book!Rhaegar would never do such a thing (even if he could.) I have definitely gotten a lot of inspiration and ideas from @lyannas and @oadara especially about annulment and the complications of Jon being and then not being a bastard, and gotten a lot of useful info from A Wiki of Ice and Fire. So huge thanks <3 The article contains mentions of rape. To begin this, we need to take a look back on what the show has made of Rhaegar so far, and the differences between the show and the book depictions. 1. In season one, Robert mentions Rhaegar’s kidnapping of Lyanna, but not in detail, just that Rhaegar did something bad to Lyanna. At the end of the season, in episode 10, Bran mentions specifically that Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna and that Robert started a war for that and killed him, but Lyanna died. Somewhere in the middle of the season, Jorah mentions that Rhaegar was the last dragon while “Viserys is less than the shadow of a snake” painting Rhaegar, for the first time on the show, in a positive light. Now, one thing in season one that interested me that nobody else ever notices (or if they do notice, they never talk about it) is when Jon was having a talk with Aemon. I always watched this conversation carefully as it is the first time that Jon communicated with a Targaryen and heard him speak of the family. One odd thing that Aemon said that I noticed is, (as well as I can remember) “But when I heard how they murdered my brother’s son, and his poor son, and the children... even the little children,” and then Aemon later clarifies the line of the latest Targaryen kings on the show, saying that his father was Maekar, and then Aemon’s brother Aegon V (Egg) ruled after him, and then came his son Aerys. This is unlike the books where Aerys is actually the son of Jaehaerys II, not Aemon V, so there’s a king in between that the show skipped. Back to the first quote now. When Aemon said “They killed my brother’s son,” he was talking about Aerys. “And his poor son,” that’s Rhaegar. Why would Aegon talk about Rhaegar especially that way? Was there some type of connection between them? Why would Aemon sympathize with Rhaegar especially? In the books, we know that Aemon exchanged letters with Rhaegar, but on the show, Aemon is now dead and we never knew (unless there’s going to be a flashback or if someone is going to find Rhaegar’s letters in Aemon’s records at Castle Black, but I don’t personally think the show gives so much regards to continuity or that Castle Black is going to exist for very long at all.) 2. In season 3, Barristan gives Dany a talk about Rhaegar and how he fought at the battle of the trident and how his men died for him because they believed in him and loved him. Again, Rhaegar is painted in a positive light, as a charismatic and well-loved leader who inspired loyalty. 3. In season 4, the very first episode. Oberyn finally appears to give us the perspective of Elia’s family on Rhaegar’s deeds. Oberyn calls Rhaegar “beautiful and noble” sarcastically and says that he left Elia for another woman after Elia had been nothing but good and kind to him and his children. He also went as far as to say that Elia loved Rhaegar. What kind of love did he mean? Did she truly love Rhaegar or was she “fond” of him? We can’t tell. 4. In season 5, the writers seemed to be in a hurry to catch up with reminding us who Rhaegar is, by inserting talks about him twice in one episode, for pretty long conversations. That is, of course, episode 4, in which Littlefinger tells Sansa the story of the tourney of Harrenhal as we all know it, quite objectively, and then asks, “How many men had to die because Rhaegar chose your aunt?” and Sansa replies, “Yes, he chose her, and then he kidnapped her and raped her.” The second time he is mentioned in that episode shows how much contrast there is between the two ways people see Rhaegar, when Barristan again paints him in a positive light by telling Dany that he liked to walk among the people, sing to them, give money to orphans and poor singers, and that he never liked killing, but loved singing. 5. And of course, in season six, came the (bastardized) conversation between Ned and the three (now two) Kingsguard at the ToJ, most importantly Arthur. Ned reminds them of Rhaegar’s defeat and asks them why they weren’t there to protect him, and Arthur replies that Rhaegar wanted them at the ToJ. And at the end of the season, Bran presses play and we resume watching this scene, leading up to the big R+L=J reveal. 6. In season seven, we are told that he (somehow????) convinced the High Septon at the time to annul his (four-year, consummated) marriage to Elia and married him to Lyanna (or to “someone else” as Gilly puts it, but we all know it’s Lyanna) in a secret ceremony in Dorne. So, what has the show missed? 1. In all of this, there isn’t a peep about the prophecy, when in the books we are told three times that Rhaegar cared about it and it motivated his actions a great deal: a. At the House of the Undying b. When we’re told that he found a scroll that changed his life and made him feel that he “must become a warrior” and c. When Maester Aemon discusses his communications with Rhaegar concerning the prophecy with Sam. So, as far as the show is concerned, Rhaegar never even heard the word prophecy, and would think The Prince that Was Promised was the name of a rock band if he heard of him. So, the part of Rhaegar’s character that escaped with Lyanna because they must have a child together who is ice + fire (and I plan on exploring why this had to be the case, why Lyanna specifically when he could have had a third child on any milkmaid or handmaiden on Dragonstone with no political consequences) basically doesn’t exist on the show. Show!Rhaegar was NOT motivated by the prophecy (and I know one could argue that he is but we just haven’t heard that yet, but I personally find it weird that we haven’t heard about this whatsoever in seven seasons, when we could have seen the scene at the HotU or at least been told by Aemon or even Barristan). 2. Rhaegar as a melancholic (potentially clinically depressed) person and an intellectual scholar is not mentioned. Again, in the books, those are important aspects of Rhaegar’s personality that also seemed to motivate his actions and affect his way of thinking. 3. Rhaegar as a politician is not mentioned. We don’t hear anything about the rift between him and his father, his plans to establish a regency/overthrow Aerys, his possible involvement in organizing the tourney of Harrenhal, and the fact that he held his own court at Dragonstone and had his own backing. Show!Rhaegar doesn’t seem to have politics in mind much either. So, what does the show tell us about Rhaegar? That Rhaegar never once thought of himself as a prophetic figure/a father to one. That he was a man who liked the smallfolk and mingling with them. That Rhaegar was charismatic, well-loved, the last dragon, and seemed like a sympathetic figure to someone as smart as Maester Aemon. And finally, that he ran away with Lyanna Stark and annulled his marriage for her, and at this point, only one reason for that is left by process of elimination: Love. So, basically what the show did, is try to simplify Rhaegar into someone that the viewer doesn’t need to look too deeply into. He was a spirited singer who didn’t care about politics but loved the people (who here wants to bet that show!Rhaegar also called all the nobles fake, made fun of fat noblewomen and made a lot of dick jokes?) and he was married to Elia for political reasons/because he needed to marry someone, but along came Lyanna Stark, he fell in love, and set aside everything (including his own family) to marry her, not even caring about all the political repercussions because, hey, he’s spirited! And all the nobles are fake! Who cares about politics, kids? Of course he later paid with his life and the lives of his entire family, but who cares, still got laid. It’s basically the same thing that the show did with Jaime. Take a complex character that has a core struggle and a life mission, simplify it into a one-dimensional character that doesn’t really require any effort to understand or depict. Now, if we look completely away from Rhaegar... why would the showmakers do this whole annulment nonsense, you say? Why did they waste screentime on it and energy writing it? Because Jon Snow is their favorite, and bastardy is such a bad thing (not just an invented and bigoted Westerosi social stigma) that, on his nameday, they decided to take it away and give him legal rights to a kingdom that he never wanted, fought for or thought of having. Even though bastardy wouldn’t have affected his ability to be a hero, and even though we already have a legal claimant with an army and three dragons, who’s struggled and fought plenty for that kingdom, there’s a small problem: She’s a woman, and she’s not everyone’s favorite like Jon Snow is. Must keep the ratings up, guys. Now, as to all the reasons why book!Rhaegar would never annul his marriage to Elia (even if it were possible, which it isn’t, because their marriage was beyond a shadow of doubt consensual and consummated, and Rhaegar needs to be a king to set her aside and take another wife, which he wasn’t yet. Source) 1. Let’s assume that Rhaegar absolutely held no value for Elia whatsoever and had no problem giving her the ultimate humiliation of annulment. Elia is a princess of Dorne, and Dorne has only ever joined the fold of Westeros by marriage. No Targaryen king was able to defeat Dorne and forcibly make it kneel to him. If Elia is returned to Dorne with such an insult as setting her aside, this threatens that Dorne might disassociate itself from the rest of Westeros again, taking away a huge asset from Rhaegar (the Dornish were his biggest allies against his father.) 2. For reasons mentioned here by Lyannas, it’s most likely that this annulment would result in Rhaenys and Aegon becoming bastards. Not only would Rhaegar not do that to his children who are also important prophetic figures to him (two heads of the dragon) but also it threatens civil war in the future. If Dorne decides to not only remove itself from Rhaegar’s backing but also align themselves behind Aegon against Lyanna’s (”legitimate”) children in the case that Rhaegar does become the king and the line of succession continues normally, a civil war similar to the Blackfyre Rebellion could break and the future of House Targaryen will be majorly threatened. Who has time for that when you’re trying to stop a zombie apocalypse? Book!Rhaegar may have been a lot of things, but he wasn’t that big an idiot as to jeopardize his future on the throne and the future of his children like this. But of course, show!Rhaegar who was practically an idiot had no problem with all that. I want to conclude by saying that we have been looking at show!Rhaegar the wrong way. We’ve all had book!Rhaegar in mind while thinking about show!Rhaegar, but the truth is, they’re two completely different people. And while book!Rhaegar is smart and sensible enough to know that he couldn’t and shouldn’t annul his marriage to Elia, show!Rhaegar, who is merely a wasteful bastardization of everything that Rhaegar is, totally would. He’s a miracle man who was able to obtain an annulment from a marriage as steady as rocks because he’s THE Rhaegar Targaryen. And while thousands of metas and rereadings have been done to understand the dilemma of book!Rhaegar, show!Rhaegar only needs you to clear your mind of book!Rhaegar, watch the show, and enjoy his jackassery. Oh, poor George...
  13. It's simple. She has the dragons, the Dothraki and the Unsullied. The claim will be hers by right of conquest, not because of her or Jon's name.
  14. Or maybe GRRM wants the revival of house Tully to come through Edmure? (I've never really had high hopes for Edmure, but maybe he'd come back to his usurped castle with an army at one point in an also Macbeth-ish parallel?) In any case, I do hope that Bran will be the revival of both houses Stark and Tully; it's either him or Sansa, really.
  15. Interesting points! Thank you for the great addition. It seems like GRRM does love this whole theme of tying the lives of small humans to big events. In this light, I think Bran will probably survive the end of the series (and maybe even become KiTN). I think if there's something going on with the ocean, it'll most likely have to do with the ironborn and their drowned god religion.