R + L = J v 72

[Rhaegar I Targaryen]

And another of my favorite Faulkner quotes:

“Perhaps they were right in putting love into books, . . . Perhaps it could not live anywhere else."- William Faulkner

If one is going to try and ferret out the bread crumbs that Martin leaves, not only what FF3 observes, but history itself is a good indicator as he is an avid lover of history. And in history, for those who tried to decipher prophesy, they seemed to do so from very personal reasons more often than not, because they inevitably saw what they wanted to see.

As smart as Rhaegar was, he wasn't exactly Madame Cleo when it came to understanding prophesy, so when he met Lyanna, what was the overriding factor in what he did love, prophesy, or both?

I'd say both and 10% prophesy and 90% Lyanna.

As I've often said, bad men need no excuses to do questionable things, but good men do, and it wouldn't be hard to believe that Rhaegar might have thought the gods wanted him to take Lyanna, and that it was the for the good of all in the end.

But whether that was true, or it was the first time in his life that what was honorable conflicted with what he wanted, I think it's possible Martin might have been influenced by the notion written by an observer of the War of the Roses and of Edward of York

"Now take heed what love may do, for love will not cast no fault nor peril in nothing." - Gregory.

Certainly the character Rhaegar cannot be compared to Edward of York, (that would be Robert more likely), but both Rhaegar and Edward did follow their hearts rather than adhere to duty, and more than likely because of that, Rhaegars prophesy was fulfilled.

In terms of Jons reaction, again, I think the switching of Gillys baby is the device by which he will forgive his Uncle. I do think he will not take the news well in the beginning, but also because of Neds tutelage on the importance of duty, as Lyse says, he may take the throne.

This is somewhat echoed in Danys own behavior. Does she pursue the throne because she wants it, or because she feels it's her duty as well as her right?

She does still dream of a little red door in more simple times.

I like this post a lot, very good :agree:

[Alia of the knife]

I like this post a lot, very good :agree:

I like this post a lot, very good :agree:

Thank you. :wub:

[Lady Gwynhyfvar]

Not that I can recall, no. :cool4:

Seriously though, there's a pretty broad agreement that R+L=J, but that while the Targaryen side is certainly contributing something, just as Bloodraven is part Targaryen part Blackwood, Lyanna the mother is more important - and that Danaerys Targaryen shouldn't be forgotten so far as the Fire side goes and has a more important role to play in this than merely being the means of delivering one or more dragons to Westeros

Thanks for replying BC.

If there's broad agreement on R+L=J, I'm not sure I understand where the clear anti RLJ sentiment of Heresy comes in. Because here I'd say the opinions are not monolithic and there exist a number of increasingly finely differentiated opinions on what the ultimate outcome will be for Jon. Clearly he identifies more with his Stark family, I've never seen anyone here deny that. But I have to agree with this:

Such a narrative build-up needs a powerful payoff, both in terms of plot development and emotional fallout. If only (or mainly) his Stark heritage was important, why bothering to make Jon half-Targaryen? Being Ned's bastard would have genetically and narratively sufficed. In this case, as in any other case, I'm all for gender parity ;)

Narratively, there has to be a purpose for the first half of the equation. As for Dany, I'm not sure we discuss her "purpose" much here, but I guarantee you that there are a multitude of opinions on that as well, and most of them would be a lot more comprehensive than dragon delivery ;)

[Lyse Stark]

And another of my favorite Faulkner quotes:

“Perhaps they were right in putting love into books, . . . Perhaps it could not live anywhere else."- William Faulkner

If one is going to try and ferret out the bread crumbs that Martin leaves, not only what FF3 observes, but history itself is a good indicator as he is an avid lover of history. And in history, for those who tried to decipher prophesy, they seemed to do so from very personal reasons more often than not, because they inevitably saw what they wanted to see.

As smart as Rhaegar was, he wasn't exactly Madame Cleo when it came to understanding prophesy, so when he met Lyanna, what was the overriding factor in what he did, love, prophesy, or both?

I'd say both and 10% prophesy and 90% Lyanna.

As I've often said, bad men need no excuses to do questionable things, but good men do, and it wouldn't be hard to believe that Rhaegar might have thought the gods wanted him to take Lyanna and that it was the for the good of all in the end.

But whether that was true, or it was the first time in his life that what was honorable conflicted with what he wanted, I think it's possible Martin might have also been influenced by the notion written by an observer of the War of the Roses and of Edward of York on his chosen Queen.

"Now take heed what love may do, for love will not cast no fault nor peril in nothing." - Gregory.

Certainly the character Rhaegar cannot be compared to Edward of York, (that would be Robert more likely), but both Rhaegar and Edward did follow their hearts rather than adhere to duty, and more than likely because of that, Rhaegars prophesy was fulfilled though his dynasty like that of Edwards, faltered.

In terms of Jons reaction, again, I think the switching of Gillys baby is the device by which he will forgive his Uncle. I do think he will not take the news well in the beginning, but also because of Neds tutelage on the importance of duty, as Lyse says, he may take the throne not because he wants it, but because he has to.

This is somewhat echoed in Danys own behavior. Does she pursue the throne because she wants it, or because she feels it's her duty as well as her right?

She does still dream of a little red door in more simple times.

I think deep inside, Dany wants power and that's because during her childhood she was powerless and grew up in poverty. And Viserys sold her off to a Dothraki horde for an army, so she hungers for it. But the desire for the little house with the red door is pulling her in a different direction.

But like Cersei, Dany's hunger for power will destroy her.

Someone posted something on the boards regarding Cersei's dream of the Iron Throne cutting her to shreds while she is naked. I interpreted it as that the lust for power, and the attempt to retain power is destroying her. And the nudity there in the dream represents the exposure of Cersei as a pathological liar.

[Alia of the knife]

I think deep inside, Dany wants power and that's because during her childhood she was powerless and grew up in poverty. And Viserys sold her off to a Dothraki horde for an army, so she hungers for it. But the desire for the little house with the red door is pulling her in a different direction.

But like Cersei, Dany's hunger for power will destroy her.

Someone posted something on the boards regarding Cersei's dream of the Iron Throne cutting her to shreds while she is naked. I interpreted it as that the lust for power, and the attempt to retain power is destroying her. And the nudity there in the dream represents the exposure of Cersei as a pathological liar.

I think also like Arya, the pervading theme of being "no one," or "nobody" when she knows who she is, is also a motivator.

[Ygrain]

Yep. Dayne was Rhaegar's best bud but Hightower appears to be a stickler for the rules. The fact that it was him who said those words made me believe that he was not just simply following Rhaegar's orders but rather upholding the primary function of the KG.

It's not just that; there is repeated emphasis on their Kingsguard status throughout the whole dialogue, which doesn't really make sense if they are not fulfilling the core of their vows.

[Consigliere]

It's not just that; there is repeated emphasis on their Kingsguard status throughout the whole dialogue, which doesn't really make sense if they are not fulfilling the core of their vows.

I agree. Speaking for myself though it was Hightowers words that convinced me. Dayne may have chosen to follow Rhaegar's orders no matter what (the Bro Code and all) but not Hightower.

[Black Crow]

Thanks for replying BC.

If there's broad agreement on R+L=J, I'm not sure I understand where the clear anti RLJ sentiment of Heresy comes in. Because here I'd say the opinions are not monolithic and there exist a number of increasingly finely differentiated opinions on what the ultimate outcome will be for Jon.

There's broad agreement certainly, its just that we're far more interested in exploring where it might go and how it fits in to the overarching Song of Ice and Fire than in what perceived rightly or wrongly to be a mission to prove the theory and refute any and all questioning of the equation.

On the previous page mention was made of the Prince that was Promised prophecy, about which we know nothing beyond an opinion (in text) that the Prince will be a Targaryen. Well and good, but what is the Prince to do and why? Why is he/she promised in the first place. There are good grounds for supposing its a Targaryen/Valyrian version of the Azor Ahai prophecy. I incline towards that myself, but again can we be sure that the two match or have been confused? Running with it, for the sake of argument, Mel tells us that a warrior will arise, draw forth the sword etc etc. and its cheerfully assumed that this has something to do with the blue-eyed horror from the North.

However GRRM has famously told us he doesn't do the Dark Lord trope and quite honestly I would have thought that the warrior prince with his magic sword is just as cheesy. Fine if you like that sort of thing but very much on a level with Dark Lords. Bearing in mind also GRRM's lapsed Catholicism there is obviously a different parallel in Jesus Christ. The point being that prophecies of the Messiah were interpreted in some quarters at least as foretelling a warrior prince, when instead something completely different turned up. In other words Jon may very well be the Prince that was Promised, but not the one expected.

[Lyse Stark]

I think also like Arya, the pervading theme of being "no one," or "nobody" when she knows who she is, is also a motivator.

And the themes of identity is also prevalent in Daenery's arc. When she embraces Fire and Blood, she doesn't think about the consequences war can have on the people. And she believe herself to be Targaryen, but deep down she doesn't really know what being a dragon really means to her.

And Jon Snow, in having been hidden away in plain sight, believes that he is the baseborn son of Eddard Stark. But he will have to come face-to-face with the truth of what he really is. And that these truths will shatter his world, and Jon has made his bastardy his armor, shows how deep-rooted lies can be.

[Lyse Stark]

There's broad agreement certainly, its just that we're far more interested in exploring where it might go and how it fits in to the overarching Song of Ice and Fire than in what perceived rightly or wrongly to be a mission to prove the theory and refute any and all questioning of the equation.

On the previous page mention was made of the Prince that was Promised prophecy, about which we know nothing beyond an opinion (in text) that the Prince will be a Targaryen. Well and good, but what is the Prince to do and why? Why is he/she promised in the first place. There are good grounds for supposing its a Targaryen/Valyrian version of the Azor Ahai prophecy. I incline towards that myself, but again can we be sure that the two match or have been confused? Running with it, for the sake of argument, Mel tells us that a warrior will arise, draw forth the sword etc etc. and its cheerfully assumed that this has something to do with the blue-eyed horror from the North.

However GRRM has famously told us he doesn't do the Dark Lord trope and quite honestly I would have thought that the warrior prince with his magic sword is just as cheesy. Fine if you like that sort of thing but very much on a level with Dark Lords. Bearing in mind also GRRM's lapsed Catholicism there is obviously a different parallel in Jesus Christ. The point being that prophecies of the Messiah were interpreted in some quarters at least as foretelling a warrior prince, when instead something completely different turned up. In other words Jon may very well be the Prince that was Promised, but not the one expected.

Or the PTWP and Azor Ahai can be two different things.

I myself believe that Azor Ahai may not be a good thing, and in Zoroastian eschatology, Gochihr, a comet shall crash upon the world at the end of time. The molten metals from the comet and earth shall purify the world, and where the sinners burns, the pious shall swim through it like warm milk.

And from that comet I thought of the bleeding star Daenerys saw on the day she hatched her dragons.

[Lady Gwynhyfvar]

There's broad agreement certainly, its just that we're far more interested in exploring where it might go and how it fits in to the overarching Song of Ice and Fire than in what perceived rightly or wrongly to be a mission to prove the theory and refute any and all questioning of the equation.

On the previous page mention was made of the Prince that was Promised prophecy, about which we know nothing beyond an opinion (in text) that the Prince will be a Targaryen. Well and good, but what is the Prince to do and why? Why is he/she promised in the first place. There are good grounds for supposing its a Targaryen/Valyrian version of the Azor Ahai prophecy. I incline towards that myself, but again can we be sure that the two match or have been confused? Running with it, for the sake of argument, Mel tells us that a warrior will arise, draw forth the sword etc etc. and its cheerfully assumed that this has something to do with the blue-eyed horror from the North.

However GRRM has famously told us he doesn't do the Dark Lord trope and quite honestly I would have thought that the warrior prince with his magic sword is just as cheesy. Fine if you like that sort of thing but very much on a level with Dark Lords. Bearing in mind also GRRM's lapsed Catholicism there is obviously a different parallel in Jesus Christ. The point being that prophecies of the Messiah were interpreted in some quarters at least as foretelling a warrior prince, when instead something completely different turned up. In other words Jon may very well be the Prince that was Promised, but not the one expected.

To get a bit meta for a moment, one of the reasons this thread exists to explain the theory of R+L=J to the curious and to refute the faulty arguments of those who would deny it. So yes, that is a big part of what goes on here. Faulting that would be akin to faulting the sun for shining. But there is also, as I've indicated in reply to you in the past, a plurality of ideas about Jon's arc and significance to the plot, and much discussion along those lines goes on in between the regulars performing the usual duties of the RLJ patrol.

Now here's something we may agree on if I understand you correctly. I happen to think there is only one Hero... as a Jungian at heart I don't believe in coincidences when it comes to the recurring themes that we see in the tales of AA, TPtwP and LH. But a Hero isn't a Dark Lord, and in order to tell that tale in a new way, it need not be an inversion. Subverting a trope could be something as simple as raising questions about the motives of the Hero by looking closely at the grey areas, something we GRRM is fond of doing. As for GRRM's lapsed Catholicism, I do bear it in mind, every day. I share with him a common background in religion, culture and education. My lapsed Catholicism informs my desire to be an iconoclast, but I cannot shed the icons that were instilled in me from a very early age, and I doubt he can either ;)

[Black Crow]

Another problem I have with the Warrior Hero/Prince is precisely this business of not just tropes but cliches. One of the biggest going is the young innocent lad who knows nothing of his destiny but embraces it reluctantly in order to do the needful or bravely die trying. That's a major reason why I'm reluctant to embrace the idea that Jon Snow will follow that particular line.

Arguably to subvert that trope properly, Jon would have to learn of his parentage, turn his back on the Wall and what lies beyond and storm southward to sieze his throne and to hell with the Others. Not going to happen obviously and overall I find it difficult to believe that this will in the end be resolved in battle, against the Others or anyone else.

[Rhaegar I Targaryen]

Another problem I have with the Warrior Hero/Prince is precisely this business of not just tropes but cliches. One of the biggest going is the young innocent lad who knows nothing of his destiny but embraces it reluctantly in order to do the needful or bravely die trying. That's a major reason why I'm reluctant to embrace the idea that Jon Snow will follow that particular line.

Arguably to subvert that trope properly, Jon would have to learn of his parentage, turn his back on the Wall and what lies beyond and storm southward to sieze his throne and to hell with the Others. Not going to happen obviously and overall I find it difficult to believe that this will in the end be resolved in battle, against the Others or anyone else.

Could be that he will lead the battle against the Others, and the legions of man will pronounce him their King, thus restoring Rhaegar's noble bloodline back upon the throne.

[Black Crow]

Nah... cliche :cool4:

[Lady Gwynhyfvar]

Another problem I have with the Warrior Hero/Prince is precisely this business of not just tropes but cliches. One of the biggest going is the young innocent lad who knows nothing of his destiny but embraces it reluctantly in order to do the needful or bravely die trying. That's a major reason why I'm reluctant to embrace the idea that Jon Snow will follow that particular line.

Arguably to subvert that trope properly, Jon would have to learn of his parentage, turn his back on the Wall and what lies beyond and storm southward to sieze his throne and to hell with the Others. Not going to happen obviously and overall I find it difficult to believe that this will in the end be resolved in battle, against the Others or anyone else.

Arguably it needn't be either of those things. Simply exploring Jon's motivations, questionable actions and inner struggles counts as a subversion of the first imo, and the second is nonsense, as you yourself say.

[Cubarey]

"Arguably to subvert that trope properly, Jon would have to learn of his parentage, turn his back on the Wall and what lies beyond and storm southward to sieze his throne and to hell with the Others. Not going to happen obviously and overall I find it difficult to believe that this will in the end be resolved in battle, against the Others or anyone else."

Dead and resurrected Jon may have to acknowledge the loss of his role as thre Nights Watch Commander. He will have to deal with fact Robb named him heir and the Wildings could name him King Beyond the Wall. He could be the major force in the North holding back the others but in need of major help. He thus agrees to an inverted polygamous marriage with Danny and Young Griff (yia outlandish idea, but a nice twist to Targs believe in polygamy arguments :eek: ) more likely is a political marriage to Dany, would make a hell of a lot of political sense and there is no evidence that fact that Dany is his aunt would bother his since of morality (His deep dislike for Craster has to do with his forcing himself on the young women of his family not necessarily that they were family).

[Lady Gwynhyfvar]

Nah... cliche :cool4:

@FrozenFire3 ... Need some of your eloquence on this subject :)

[Rhaegar I Targaryen]

Nah... cliche :cool4:

Don't think I don't know what those sunglasses are all about-- your blinded by your hatred of Rhaegar :devil:

[MtnLion]

• The High Priest of R'hollor claims Dany is AA reborn.

Maester Aemon believed Dany is the PtwP.

Mel stated that AA and the PtwP are the same person, and Aemon did not say anything too contradict her. (Not that I buy in to everything Mel says) .

So where does that leave Jon? In the North dealing with winter. I believe his Stark blood is much more important to him and his story. Now, GRRM stated Jon 's parentage will eventually be laid out, but he didnt say for sure that Jon will be the one to hear it.

All are distractions, commonly referred to as red herrings. Every time that someone says such and such is AA, Jon's mother, the Prince that was Promised it has been a misdirection.

[Lyse Stark]

All are distractions, commonly referred to as red herrings. Every time that someone says such and such is AA, Jon's mother, the Prince that was Promised it has been a misdirection.

:agree: In that regards I think Dany may not be the saviour figure that many fan of her believes her to be.