A+J=T v.7

[yolkboy]

 

Well, if that "some purpose" is the ability to ride dragons, it is circular logic for the time being. Worse, it is spelled out in the text as such before it is proven. That brings it closer to a giant red herring territory.

 

Moreover, A+J is not the only way to give Targaryen blood to Tyrion if that is the only purpose. Six daughters of Garmund Hightower and the possible descendants of Viserys Plumm or some illegitimate descent are perfectly valid options.

 

So, the picture is more or less like this:

 

The foundation of the AJT is based on circular logic.

The danger of red herring is in the horizon.

The evidences are very inconclusive and stretchy.

If the only purpose is Targ blood, there are many other options.

Two SSMs that challenge AJT seriously are hard to brush away.

 

I don't think you understand circular logic, red herring or fatherhood.

[Mithras]

I don't think you understand circular logic, red herring or fatherhood.

 

Circular logic: Targaryen blood is required to ride dragons. Even Ran admitted it. Gyldayn and the others believed that the dragonseeds had Targaryen blood merely because they managed to ride dragons.

 

Red Herring: It is spelled out in the text many times that Targaryen blood is required to ride dragons. But we do not have the data to confirm it and some facts and logic that suggest otherwise.

 

Fatherhood: George was careful enough to say that Jon was named by “Ned” instead of “his father”. Compare that to what he said about Tyrion in the same sentence.

[Lord Varys]

I'm not sure why you even care to argue about this whole theory, Mithras. Don't you believe that Gerion is Tyrion's father?

[Mithras]

I'm not sure why you even care to argue about this whole theory, Mithras. Don't you believe that Gerion is Tyrion's father?

 

Yes, G + J = T would be an ironic twist that can explain many things.

 

And I will fight against this theory till the bitter end because this theory is a great insult to RLJ. Plus, this theory is based on two great red herrings in the making as I see it.

[Dany's Golden Fleece]

 

Yes, G + J = T would be an ironic twist that can explain many things.

 

And I will fight against this theory till the bitter end because this theory is a great insult to RLJ. Plus, this theory is based on two great red herrings in the making as I see it.

 

And so we come to the crux of the matter.  Tyrion cant be a Targ coz Jon........

[Lord Varys]

Well, 'G+J=T' is an insult to common sense, if you ask me ;-).

[Jô Maltese]

What does always strike me is how people focus on details on texts and GRRM quotes and dismiss their whole signification. For instance, when GRRM states that Dany was likely named by her mother, Tyrion by his father and Jon by Ned, what strikes me as well is that he actually does not say "Rhaella, Tywin and Ned" or that Dany being "named by her [dead] mother" is rather strange. It also strikes me in this case that GRRM may have used these words "mother, father and Ned" simply to avoid a rather inelegant repetition "mother... father ... father". Another example is the "The third head is not necessarily a Targaryen": the main information here IMHO is that the three heads are three persons!

[Ragnorak]

I dont think there was anything unsure about Nettles, she lived on Dragonstone, she came forth when they called forward the seeds. (who in their right mind would come forward if they werent a seed).  She was able to tame a wild dragon, she bonded with that dragon and stayed with him her whole life after she tamed him (just like Valyrians have always done).  She was sleeping with or companions with Dameon (a guy who likes girls from his own family).  She was named 'dragonseed' by the maesters.  There is nothing unclear about it in the literature, only people on this forum fighting the inevitable anytime GRRM doesnt specifically spell out every single word to them.

 

In the case of Nettles she lacked any explicit identification as a "seed." Her lack of typical physical Valyrian features also makes her stand out more in this regard and the fact that she has a unique method of taming a dragon serves to draw even more attention to her. The possibility that she might not be a "seed" is very deliberate on Martin's part. There are other aspects in the story that can call the need for "special blood" into question. Why did anyone need a special horn to control dragons if the blood already accomplishes the same task? My point isn't to argue that there is or isn't a need for special blood, but only that Martin has deliberately left the issue ambiguous or at least partially uncertain regardless of which side of the aisle one's beliefs happen to fall on. This uncertainty has an effect on the reader. For one it leaves an air of mystery surrounding the nature of dragon riding and airs of mystery feel more magical to a reader. There is a literary effect that can be achieved through uncertainty.

 

In the case of Tyrion's biological father there is also an air of uncertainty that results from Martin not explicitly revealing the truth one way or the other. He definitely teases the possibility because Tywin as much as says to Tyrion that he has his doubts and then Barristan fills in the suspect with his Aerys recollections to Dany. Long before TWOIAF blatantly fueled the issue there was ample reason to entertain the possibility even if certain proof was elusive. Again the ambiguity and lack of definitive knowledge has a literary effect. It has an impact on the reader's experience.

 

For example, the reader's uncertainty about Tyrion's true parentage mimics Tywin's uncertainty. So one such effect is that our own inability to extract the truth despite cause to doubt puts us in the exact same position as Tywin. The reader must weigh the issue with no ability to come to a definitive conclusion just as Tywin must have done for decades. If true, Aerys performed a Rains of Castamere on Tywin's House. He robbed him of Jaime as an heir and left him with Aerys' own bastard Tyrion to inherit the Rock in the same stroke that murdered Tywin's wife. One belief makes Tywin's slaughter of Aerys' House a very personal revenge while the other paints it as an ice cold purely political calculation. So there are two very different characterizations of Tywin that emerge based on how the reader believes he resolved that same uncertainty.

 

The actual dragon riding aspect of this is the least important dynamic for me. The actual three dragon riders holds very little sway over my imagination outside of the implications for the characters themselves. So let's say Tyrion is a dragon rider. It would be likely that the general Westerosi public would conclude that Aerys was indeed his father and that would create a certain "forgiveness" for the crime of kinslaying in the public eye. But does Tyrion "forgive" himself based on that public reaction? Do we as readers know for certain at this point as to the truth of his father? If so did we learn it from Tyrion's POV or another POV that leaves the reader knowing but not Tyrion? Exactly how, if ever, A+J=T is revealed (one way or the other) is very significant in terms of the impact on the storytelling itself and the reader's interaction with the character's POV based on what knowledge the character and/or the reader does and does not have.

 

We currently can't know for certain based on the information so far, but the author has deliberately teased the possibility. As readers we have to ponder Tyrion's "true father" without actually knowing the truth of his biological father. It forces the question of "what is a father?" to come to the forefront specifically because of the uncertainty. Even on the dragon riding front, Tyrion becoming one may simply add to the uncertainty rather than act as a form of proof of his Targaryen blood. I mention that not to take sides in either the special blood or Tyrion parentage debate but rather to emphasize the importance of "uncertainty" as a tool in Martin's storytelling. (For the record I'm quite inclined to believe A+J=T)

 

Personally I see enough material in the Lannister family dynamics alone to justify a storytelling purpose for A+J=T even if no dragons existed in this story. While the three dragon riders have failed to grasp my imagination, Tyrion's parentage has. There is a fatherhood theme that runs throughout the story. Jaime has it from both the Tywin angle and the Joffrey/Tommen/Myrcella angle. Theon has it with Balon and Ned and Balon certainly has it with Theon. Quenton is yet another example. Jon has it with a number of foster father figures but most clearly with Ned and Rhaegar. In Jon's case Ned is such a benevolent figure in his life it feels like robbing him of something to ascribe "fatherhood" to Rhaegar. The reveal will be far more about the mother he has always wondered about than the father he never knew he was missing. In Tyrion's case since Tywin has been such a negative influence and he has been written with such a heavy sympathetic touch, it feels like depriving him of Tywin as a biological father is a kindness to the character. The emotion behind that strikes me as the source for feeling like Aerys as a father "ruins" the Tywin/Tyrion dynamic. But that emotional take ignores how Martin has treated fatherhood. Looking at the treatment of the fatherhood theme in the series as a whole it actually fits perfectly. In many ways Tyrion having a different biological father only serves to emphasize Tywin's role as his true father figure especially given the way Martin has presented the role of fatherhood in character's like Theon and especially Jon. The questions raised about Tyrion's biological father are actually what makes him align with the rest of the fatherhood treatment in the series.

 

 

I really want to thank you for putting all the information on AJT up front. I haven't read all eleven pages but at least 7 of them so I think I've got the gist. You've presented a convincing argument with many things I hadn't noticed on my first read through.

There were things I did notice though that made me suspicious. One is a developing trope in the series of what I call 'corrupted Camelot trios', with Arthurian characters, particularly Arthur himself, as a basis for more than one character, twisted out of shape by GRRM.

I won't go into this theory here but suffice to say Robert-Cersei-Jaime is one based on an Arthur Guinever Lancelot trio where Arthur becomes an unhappy bloated king and Lancelot and Guinevere are incestuous twins.

Another is the Aerys-Joanna-Tywin trio based on Uther-Ygrainne-Gorlois. Casterly Rock might as well be Tintagel with its similarity of description and location. Tintagel was where King Arthur was conceived and born. Aerys's lust for Joanna is striking and seems out of place but it is described exactly like High King Uther's lust for Ygrainne, wife of subject king Gorlois, is described. The result of a shapechange - Ygrainne believes she is sleeping with her husband but it is really Uther - is King Arthur who scholars suspect was a real life war leader.

I mention all this briefly - I know myth texts can be boring to people who haven't read the originals - because in combination with Tyrion's shadow being as tall as a king's, his comfort in the hall of dragons, his interest in dragons, and Ghost's immediate dislike of him, this tale underpinning Tyrion's birth, his birthplace, his parents, and his role as a war leader at King's Landing made me suspect he might be Aerys's son with Joanna Lannister. I had never read a post on this subject (didnt even know the forums existed) and moreover wasn't even considering him riding a dragon at that point. But the Arthurian allusions made me suspect it more than anything, so if you do include mythical allusions as evidence for your theory, here is something that helps support it.

So not only is George using textual clues such as Tyrion's eyes, he is using allusion that a lot of fantasy readers who've read the Arthur sagas such as myself might pick up on. But it's disturbed and almost unrecognizable because as I said this is a corrupted Camelot trio playing by George's rules in an end-time, a twilight, not a beginning. Tyrion is a dwarf because of Aerys's dragon inheritance, son of a mad king, probably the result of a rape rather than a shapechange (though we can't rule that out in a book where shapechanging happens). George follows these kinds of myth and legend tropes again and again, alluding to them then twisting them. But they are still there.

Also, I don't know if you included this: Azor Ahai tried to temper his 'sword' in a lion's heart - Joanna was Tywin's 'heart'- but failed to produce Lightbringer. Tyrion is the result instead.

His time was too soon, as was Rhaegar's (crackpot:who might be Bonifer Hasty's son born from his father's 'water' house too hastily amidst the Bonfire of Summerhall). Tinfoil I know but why did we get that tidbit about Bonifer?

Lastly,when did George make that remark about dragonriders not having to be Targs? I ask because I wonder if it's because of the show, which doesn't have time to include much backstory. In the show, we might have Tyrion riding a dragon without any reveal about his possible heritage, whereas in the books we get the clues and a possible reveal. If it's not going to be in the show, that might be a reason for his remarks?

 

Wonderful observations all around. If you are ever inclined to write up your Arthurian insights I would be delighted to read them.

 

Small point regarding Bonifer. A woodswitch, who seems almost certainly to be the Ghost of Highheart, predicted that the Prince that was Promised would be born of the line of Aerys and Rhaella. So if Bonifer were Rhaegar's father that would rule out Jon or force the Ghost of Highheart to have been wrong (or her words incorrectly relayed.) It would also rule out Aegon for anyone who takes him seriously. Tyrion is also ruled out as a candidate for the same reasons even if Aerys is his father. If Ser Bonifer interests you then you might like Tze's post on Sansa as an inversion of Beauty and the Beast if you have not seen it. It draws parallels with Rhaella and Ser Bonifer.

[Jô Maltese]

 

In the case of Nettles she lacked any explicit identification as a "seed." Her lack of typical physical Valyrian features also makes her stand out more in this regard and the fact that she has a unique method of taming a dragon serves to draw even more attention to her. The possibility that she might not be a "seed" is very deliberate on Martin's part. There are other aspects in the story that can call the need for "special blood" into question. Why did anyone need a special horn to control dragons if the blood already accomplishes the same task? My point isn't to argue that there is or isn't a need for special blood, but only that Martin has deliberately left the issue ambiguous or at least partially uncertain regardless of which side of the aisle one's beliefs happen to fall on. This uncertainty has an effect on the reader. For one it leaves an air of mystery surrounding the nature of dragon riding and airs of mystery feel more magical to a reader. There is a literary effect that can be achieved through uncertainty.

 

In the case of Tyrion's biological father there is also an air of uncertainty that results from Martin not explicitly revealing the truth one way or the other. He definitely teases the possibility because Tywin as much as says to Tyrion that he has his doubts and then Barristan fills in the suspect with his Aerys recollections to Dany. Long before TWOIAF blatantly fueled the issue there was ample reason to entertain the possibility even if certain proof was elusive. Again the ambiguity and lack of definitive knowledge has a literary effect. It has an impact on the reader's experience.

 

For example, the reader's uncertainty about Tyrion's true parentage mimics Tywin's uncertainty. So one such effect is that our own inability to extract the truth despite cause to doubt puts us in the exact same position as Tywin. The reader must weigh the issue with no ability to come to a definitive conclusion just as Tywin must have done for decades. If true, Aerys performed a Rains of Castamere on Tywin's House. He robbed him of Jaime as an heir and left him with Aerys' own bastard Tyrion to inherit the Rock in the same stroke that murdered Tywin's wife. One belief makes Tywin's slaughter of Aerys' House a very personal revenge while the other paints it as an ice cold purely political calculation. So there are two very different characterizations of Tywin that emerge based on how the reader believes he resolved that same uncertainty.

 

The actual dragon riding aspect of this is the least important dynamic for me. The actual three dragon riders holds very little sway over my imagination outside of the implications for the characters themselves. So let's say Tyrion is a dragon rider. It would be likely that the general Westerosi public would conclude that Aerys was indeed his father and that would create a certain "forgiveness" for the crime of kinslaying in the public eye. But does Tyrion "forgive" himself based on that public reaction? Do we as readers know for certain at this point as to the truth of his father? If so did we learn it from Tyrion's POV or another POV that leaves the reader knowing but not Tyrion? Exactly how, if ever, A+J=T is revealed (one way or the other) is very significant in terms of the impact on the storytelling itself and the reader's interaction with the character's POV based on what knowledge the character and/or the reader does and does not have.

 

We currently can't know for certain based on the information so far, but the author has deliberately teased the possibility. As readers we have to ponder Tyrion's "true father" without actually knowing the truth of his biological father. It forces the question of "what is a father?" to come to the forefront specifically because of the uncertainty. Even on the dragon riding front, Tyrion becoming one may simply add to the uncertainty rather than act as a form of proof of his Targaryen blood. I mention that not to take sides in either the special blood or Tyrion parentage debate but rather to emphasize the importance of "uncertainty" as a tool in Martin's storytelling. (For the record I'm quite inclined to believe A+J=T)

 

Personally I see enough material in the Lannister family dynamics alone to justify a storytelling purpose for A+J=T even if no dragons existed in this story. While the three dragon riders have failed to grasp my imagination, Tyrion's parentage has. There is a fatherhood theme that runs throughout the story. Jaime has it from both the Tywin angle and the Joffrey/Tommen/Myrcella angle. Theon has it with Balon and Ned and Balon certainly has it with Theon. Quenton is yet another example. Jon has it with a number of foster father figures but most clearly with Ned and Rhaegar. In Jon's case Ned is such a benevolent figure in his life it feels like robbing him of something to ascribe "fatherhood" to Rhaegar. The reveal will be far more about the mother he has always wondered about than the father he never knew he was missing. In Tyrion's case since Tywin has been such a negative influence and he has been written with such a heavy sympathetic touch, it feels like depriving him of Tywin as a biological father is a kindness to the character. The emotion behind that strikes me as the source for feeling like Aerys as a father "ruins" the Tywin/Tyrion dynamic. But that emotional take ignores how Martin has treated fatherhood. Looking at the treatment of the fatherhood theme in the series as a whole it actually fits perfectly. In many ways Tyrion having a different biological father only serves to emphasize Tywin's role as his true father figure especially given the way Martin has presented the role of fatherhood in character's like Theon and especially Jon. The questions raised about Tyrion's biological father are actually what makes him align with the rest of the fatherhood treatment in the series.

 

 

 

Wonderful observations all around. If you are ever inclined to write up your Arthurian insights I would be delighted to read them.

 

Small point regarding Bonifer. A woodswitch, who seems almost certainly to be the Ghost of Highheart, predicted that the Prince that was Promised would be born of the line of Aerys and Rhaella. So if Bonifer were Rhaegar's father that would rule out Jon or force the Ghost of Highheart to have been wrong (or her words incorrectly relayed.) It would also rule out Aegon for anyone who takes him seriously. Tyrion is also ruled out as a candidate for the same reasons even if Aerys is his father. If Ser Bonifer interests you then you might like Tze's post on Sansa as an inversion of Beauty and the Beast if you have not seen it. It draws parallels with Rhaella and Ser Bonifer.

:agree: in full.  :bowdown:

[Mithras]

In the case of Nettles she lacked any explicit identification as a "seed." Her lack of typical physical Valyrian features also makes her stand out more in this regard and the fact that she has a unique method of taming a dragon serves to draw even more attention to her. The possibility that she might not be a "seed" is very deliberate on Martin's part. There are other aspects in the story that can call the need for "special blood" into question. Why did anyone need a special horn to control dragons if the blood already accomplishes the same task? My point isn't to argue that there is or isn't a need for special blood, but only that Martin has deliberately left the issue ambiguous or at least partially uncertain regardless of which side of the aisle one's beliefs happen to fall on. This uncertainty has an effect on the reader. For one it leaves an air of mystery surrounding the nature of dragon riding and airs of mystery feel more magical to a reader. There is a literary effect that can be achieved through uncertainty.

 

In the case of Tyrion's biological father there is also an air of uncertainty that results from Martin not explicitly revealing the truth one way or the other. He definitely teases the possibility because Tywin as much as says to Tyrion that he has his doubts and then Barristan fills in the suspect with his Aerys recollections to Dany. Long before TWOIAF blatantly fueled the issue there was ample reason to entertain the possibility even if certain proof was elusive. Again the ambiguity and lack of definitive knowledge has a literary effect. It has an impact on the reader's experience.

 

For example, the reader's uncertainty about Tyrion's true parentage mimics Tywin's uncertainty. So one such effect is that our own inability to extract the truth despite cause to doubt puts us in the exact same position as Tywin. The reader must weigh the issue with no ability to come to a definitive conclusion just as Tywin must have done for decades. If true, Aerys performed a Rains of Castamere on Tywin's House. He robbed him of Jaime as an heir and left him with Aerys' own bastard Tyrion to inherit the Rock in the same stroke that murdered Tywin's wife. One belief makes Tywin's slaughter of Aerys' House a very personal revenge while the other paints it as an ice cold purely political calculation. So there are two very different characterizations of Tywin that emerge based on how the reader believes he resolved that same uncertainty.

 

The actual dragon riding aspect of this is the least important dynamic for me. The actual three dragon riders holds very little sway over my imagination outside of the implications for the characters themselves. So let's say Tyrion is a dragon rider. It would be likely that the general Westerosi public would conclude that Aerys was indeed his father and that would create a certain "forgiveness" for the crime of kinslaying in the public eye. But does Tyrion "forgive" himself based on that public reaction? Do we as readers know for certain at this point as to the truth of his father? If so did we learn it from Tyrion's POV or another POV that leaves the reader knowing but not Tyrion? Exactly how, if ever, A+J=T is revealed (one way or the other) is very significant in terms of the impact on the storytelling itself and the reader's interaction with the character's POV based on what knowledge the character and/or the reader does and does not have.

 

We currently can't know for certain based on the information so far, but the author has deliberately teased the possibility. As readers we have to ponder Tyrion's "true father" without actually knowing the truth of his biological father. It forces the question of "what is a father?" to come to the forefront specifically because of the uncertainty. Even on the dragon riding front, Tyrion becoming one may simply add to the uncertainty rather than act as a form of proof of his Targaryen blood. I mention that not to take sides in either the special blood or Tyrion parentage debate but rather to emphasize the importance of "uncertainty" as a tool in Martin's storytelling. (For the record I'm quite inclined to believe A+J=T)

 

Personally I see enough material in the Lannister family dynamics alone to justify a storytelling purpose for A+J=T even if no dragons existed in this story. While the three dragon riders have failed to grasp my imagination, Tyrion's parentage has. There is a fatherhood theme that runs throughout the story. Jaime has it from both the Tywin angle and the Joffrey/Tommen/Myrcella angle. Theon has it with Balon and Ned and Balon certainly has it with Theon. Quenton is yet another example. Jon has it with a number of foster father figures but most clearly with Ned and Rhaegar. In Jon's case Ned is such a benevolent figure in his life it feels like robbing him of something to ascribe "fatherhood" to Rhaegar. The reveal will be far more about the mother he has always wondered about than the father he never knew he was missing. In Tyrion's case since Tywin has been such a negative influence and he has been written with such a heavy sympathetic touch, it feels like depriving him of Tywin as a biological father is a kindness to the character. The emotion behind that strikes me as the source for feeling like Aerys as a father "ruins" the Tywin/Tyrion dynamic. But that emotional take ignores how Martin has treated fatherhood. Looking at the treatment of the fatherhood theme in the series as a whole it actually fits perfectly. In many ways Tyrion having a different biological father only serves to emphasize Tywin's role as his true father figure especially given the way Martin has presented the role of fatherhood in character's like Theon and especially Jon. The questions raised about Tyrion's biological father are actually what makes him align with the rest of the fatherhood treatment in the series.

 

George had to tease with Tyrion's paternity because the moment he makes Tyrion a dragonrider, characters in the story have to talk about it. Without the dragonrider aspect and only considering the Lannister family dynamics, Gerion is much more a father to Tyrion than Tywin or Aerys ever was. He encouraged and appreciated him. He was always nice to him. From that perspective, GJT makes much more sense than AJT.

[Mithras]

Well, 'G+J=T' is an insult to common sense, if you ask me ;-).

So you find Joanna whoring herself to Aerys for gain or some "reconciliation sex between the two completely rea"sonable; but Gerion (a man with good humour, possibly good with women, a sailor, who also hated Tywin) seducing Joanna at CR in the absence of Tywin utterly against the common sense.

[Ragnorak]

:agree: in full.  :bowdown:

 

Thank you.

 

 

 

George had to tease with Tyrion's paternity because the moment he makes Tyrion a dragonrider, characters in the story have to talk about it. Without the dragonrider aspect and only considering the Lannister family dynamics, Gerion is much more a father to Tyrion than Tywin or Aerys ever was. He encouraged and appreciated him. He was always nice to him. From that perspective, GJT makes much more sense than AJT.

 

In this regard you are only looking at the positive or the benevolent aspects of fatherhood. Not all fatherhood experiences are positive and the negative experiences still serve to shape the future man. Theon's current predicament is the result of some rather negative fatherly influences on Balon's part. Randyll Tarly is very much a father to Sam in that he shaped Sam into the man that he is today. Sam's struggle is to overcome the negative legacy his father left him with but that doesn't make Randyll any less the father who raised and shaped Sam. Cersei's maternal influence on Joffrey is a huge part of what makes him the monumental ass that he is (well thankfully was.) That influence is hardly the benevolent archetypal maternal role we associate with nurturing and comfort, but it is the parental hand that shaped the child nonetheless.

 

Tyrion is character that both hates Tywin and yet desperately struggles for his approval. He models himself after Tywin while at the same time trying-- and often failing-- to be different. No one ever mistook Tyrion for being Gerion writ small. Tyrion never thinks, "Hey what would Gerion do here?" Tyrion doesn't dream of being a pirate and making his father and sister walk the plank. Genna never says, "Hey that Tyrion is so much like Gerion." Kindness and fatherhood are not synonymous and kindness from Gerion is not what shaped Tyrion into the character we see on the page.

[Buried Treasure]

Since reading tPatQ I have settled on the idea that dragons hatched 'tame' are most easily ridden by relatives or descendants or somebody that reminds the dragon of its first rider. I'm thinking a mild form of imprinting sometimes seen in hand-reared birds or other fantasy dragons, with Pern being the example that I best remember.


It ties together the idea of only Targaryens being able to ride dragons that were historically Targ owned without making them have ridiculously super magic special blood. Of the three wild dragons captured during the war, two were feral and it was the one hatched wild that was tamed through being fed sheep by the rider least likely to have Targ blood.

Dany's three are all already imprinted on her in some way, even though she cannot ride two of them. The people with the best chance of not dying in an attempt to become dragon riders would be those related to her or perhaps those she was close to in affection or as a sexual partner.

[Lady Barbrey]

Edited: pushed post accidentally.

[Lady Barbrey]

In the case of Nettles she lacked any explicit identification as a "seed." Her lack of typical physical Valyrian features also makes her stand out more in this regard and the fact that she has a unique method of taming a dragon serves to draw even more attention to her. The possibility that she might not be a "seed" is very deliberate on Martin's part. There are other aspects in the story that can call the need for "special blood" into question. Why did anyone need a special horn to control dragons if the blood already accomplishes the same task? My point isn't to argue that there is or isn't a need for special blood, but only that Martin has deliberately left the issue ambiguous or at least partially uncertain regardless of which side of the aisle one's beliefs happen to fall on. This uncertainty has an effect on the reader. For one it leaves an air of mystery surrounding the nature of dragon riding and airs of mystery feel more magical to a reader. There is a literary effect that can be achieved through uncertainty.
 
In the case of Tyrion's biological father there is also an air of uncertainty that results from Martin not explicitly revealing the truth one way or the other. He definitely teases the possibility because Tywin as much as says to Tyrion that he has his doubts and then Barristan fills in the suspect with his Aerys recollections to Dany. Long before TWOIAF blatantly fueled the issue there was ample reason to entertain the possibility even if certain proof was elusive. Again the ambiguity and lack of definitive knowledge has a literary effect. It has an impact on the reader's experience.
 
For example, the reader's uncertainty about Tyrion's true parentage mimics Tywin's uncertainty. So one such effect is that our own inability to extract the truth despite cause to doubt puts us in the exact same position as Tywin. The reader must weigh the issue with no ability to come to a definitive conclusion just as Tywin must have done for decades. If true, Aerys performed a Rains of Castamere on Tywin's House. He robbed him of Jaime as an heir and left him with Aerys' own bastard Tyrion to inherit the Rock in the same stroke that murdered Tywin's wife. One belief makes Tywin's slaughter of Aerys' House a very personal revenge while the other paints it as an ice cold purely political calculation. So there are two very different characterizations of Tywin that emerge based on how the reader believes he resolved that same uncertainty.
 
The actual dragon riding aspect of this is the least important dynamic for me. The actual three dragon riders holds very little sway over my imagination outside of the implications for the characters themselves. So let's say Tyrion is a dragon rider. It would be likely that the general Westerosi public would conclude that Aerys was indeed his father and that would create a certain "forgiveness" for the crime of kinslaying in the public eye. But does Tyrion "forgive" himself based on that public reaction? Do we as readers know for certain at this point as to the truth of his father? If so did we learn it from Tyrion's POV or another POV that leaves the reader knowing but not Tyrion? Exactly how, if ever, A+J=T is revealed (one way or the other) is very significant in terms of the impact on the storytelling itself and the reader's interaction with the character's POV based on what knowledge the character and/or the reader does and does not have.
 
We currently can't know for certain based on the information so far, but the author has deliberately teased the possibility. As readers we have to ponder Tyrion's "true father" without actually knowing the truth of his biological father. It forces the question of "what is a father?" to come to the forefront specifically because of the uncertainty. Even on the dragon riding front, Tyrion becoming one may simply add to the uncertainty rather than act as a form of proof of his Targaryen blood. I mention that not to take sides in either the special blood or Tyrion parentage debate but rather to emphasize the importance of "uncertainty" as a tool in Martin's storytelling. (For the record I'm quite inclined to believe A+J=T)
 
Personally I see enough material in the Lannister family dynamics alone to justify a storytelling purpose for A+J=T even if no dragons existed in this story. While the three dragon riders have failed to grasp my imagination, Tyrion's parentage has. There is a fatherhood theme that runs throughout the story. Jaime has it from both the Tywin angle and the Joffrey/Tommen/Myrcella angle. Theon has it with Balon and Ned and Balon certainly has it with Theon. Quenton is yet another example. Jon has it with a number of foster father figures but most clearly with Ned and Rhaegar. In Jon's case Ned is such a benevolent figure in his life it feels like robbing him of something to ascribe "fatherhood" to Rhaegar. The reveal will be far more about the mother he has always wondered about than the father he never knew he was missing. In Tyrion's case since Tywin has been such a negative influence and he has been written with such a heavy sympathetic touch, it feels like depriving him of Tywin as a biological father is a kindness to the character. The emotion behind that strikes me as the source for feeling like Aerys as a father "ruins" the Tywin/Tyrion dynamic. But that emotional take ignores how Martin has treated fatherhood. Looking at the treatment of the fatherhood theme in the series as a whole it actually fits perfectly. In many ways Tyrion having a different biological father only serves to emphasize Tywin's role as his true father figure especially given the way Martin has presented the role of fatherhood in character's like Theon and especially Jon. The questions raised about Tyrion's biological father are actually what makes him align with the rest of the fatherhood treatment in the series.
 
 

 
Wonderful observations all around. If you are ever inclined to write up your Arthurian insights I would be delighted to read them.
 
Small point regarding Bonifer. A woodswitch, who seems almost certainly to be the Ghost of Highheart, predicted that the Prince that was Promised would be born of the line of Aerys and Rhaella. So if Bonifer were Rhaegar's father that would rule out Jon or force the Ghost of Highheart to have been wrong (or her words incorrectly relayed.) It would also rule out Aegon for anyone who takes him seriously. Tyrion is also ruled out as a candidate for the same reasons even if Aerys is his father. If Ser Bonifer interests you then you might like Tze's post on Sansa as an inversion of Beauty and the Beast if you have not seen it. It draws parallels with Rhaella and Ser Bonifer.

I loved this post! Particularly your observations about the uncertainties for Tywin and the reader alike, and fatherhood as a motif.

Re the Beauty and the Beast inversion - I will certainly read it. Thanks for the heads up.

My ruminations on Bonifer actually come from thinking about the tempering of the sword, Lightbringer, who I believe was Danaerys and by extension her dragons. The thing about that prophecy is that Aerys and Rhaella, aside from gender, are exact replicas in bloodlines. We've already seen a prince from prophecy become a princess in Dany. I have no reason to doubt Aemon on that; I think that was valid information and he wasn't wrong. Nissa Nissa's very name connotes sameness. Same-same. Rhaella and Aerys were from the same 'Egg' in a sense. Either one could be Azor Ahai, either one Nissa Nissa. The story is gendered male, about a sword, but as Aemon points out, dragons are androgynous. Now one now the other. If the Azor Ahai prophecy is a birth story, then the false starts in tempering could come from either Aerys and Rhaella, or both.

It's only when they come together, after a very long period of time and a number of mistrials that they produce Dany. This is consistent with the relative long tempering of the sword and its birth from 'same-same' Nissa Nissa. But if that's true, why did Rhaegar and Viserys,who grew up as viable children, not work? I would submit it's possible that in this case it's because neither of them were Aerys's children. T


The texts give us just a few hints to this. The Bonifer Hasty story with a possible alternate father for Rhaegar. Temper with water, not enough time. The Joanna Lannister story, temper with a lion's heart, not enough time.

And Viserys might have been Tywin's, another Targ/lion pairing. A revenge fuck. Why the revenge fuck with Shae if Tywin wasn't getting back at Tyrion, someone he saw as an extension of Aerys? Going back even further, why the revenge fucking of Tysha, such a manifestation of twisted hate but also revenge on Aerys through his son. Out of everything regarding Tywin, the thing with Shae seemed the most inconsistent thing ever. He hates whores because of his own father, but likely also because of his doubts about Joanna. Any time I see these inconsistencies in character I go on alert, because it usually means George is telling us something else about the past or the future.

Did he do this in the past to revenge himself on Aerys after he believed Aerys did this with him? I'm not saying this is correct but it makes sense of four things: Tywin fucking Shae, Joffrey and Viserys's startlingly similar personalities (wondered about this long before wondering about parentage), why Tywin made sure Rhaenys and Aegon were killed but later never went after Viserys, and the very long build up of Aerys's humiliation of Tywin culminating in taking his heir for the KG so his own son Tyrion would inherit Casterly Rock, and Tywin doing the same right back with even higher stakes - Tywin's son Viserys as the sole Targaryan heir of Westeros if Robert didn't marry Cersei. Murdering the children makes sense in that context. The man always had a back up plan. He always won. Joke's on Aerys.

Just a fun theory but one I wouldn't mind being true.

But it does come down to me not thinking Jon is the Prince that was Promised or Azor Ahai. He's fulfilling some prophecy - something the Wildlings seem to know more about - but not those ones. I guess I'm like you in that the dragon-riders are not so important to me. Anyone with a bit of Targ blood might be able to ride them with the right knowledge I don't think anyone will be that surprised if Tyrion rides one, I think they will be VERY surprised if Arya rides one. That's who I think George is referring to when he speaks of a non-Targ riding a dragon. She cannot be the blood of a dragon in any kind of secret parentage way. I think we can all agree on that. My suspicion on why she might be able to do it relies on another theory but this is not the place for it.

[Chinoiserie]

 

George had to tease with Tyrion's paternity because the moment he makes Tyrion a dragonrider, characters in the story have to talk about it. Without the dragonrider aspect and only considering the Lannister family dynamics, Gerion is much more a father to Tyrion than Tywin or Aerys ever was. He encouraged and appreciated him. He was always nice to him. From that perspective, GJT makes much more sense than AJT.

 

Gerion left his child (Joy) to go to what was basically a foolish suicide mission essentially because he wanted glory (Genna talks how Tywin's brothers were in his shadow and fighting for some light and Tywin objected the trip so obviously Gerion did not need to go to the trip). So not much of a father.  Additionally I do not think the way he bought slaves and forced them to sail to Valyria with him when his sailors left was pretty horrible and not something people ever mention.

 

And I feel you greatly exaggerate Gerion's influence in Tyrions life. Both Tyget and Gerion were asking what Tyrion wanted for a name day present, Tyrion mentions it was only Jaime who was kind to him during his horrible childhood (or something like that, and I think he is overly self-pitying here since I do think all his uncles, Genna and probably some other Lannisters and servants were nice to him), Tyrion wanted to go to the trip with Gerion but he left around the same time Tyrion became an adult so it was natural for Tyrion to want to go then. He does think Gerion only related to those instance so I would not say they were that close. Gerion probably was Tyrion's favorite uncle because he was funny. And someone being a liked uncle is not the same as a father figure.

[Chinoiserie]

And Viserys might have been Tywin's, another Targ/lion pairing. A revenge fuck. Why the revenge fuck with Shae if Tywin wasn't getting back at Tyrion, someone he saw as an extension of Aerys? Going back even further, why the revenge fucking of Tysha, such a manifestation of twisted hate but also revenge on Aerys through his son. Out of everything regarding Tywin, the thing with Shae seemed the most inconsistent thing ever. He hates whores because of his own father, but likely also because of his doubts about Joanna. Any time I see these inconsistencies in character I go on alert, because it usually means George is telling us something else about the past or the future.

Did he do this in the past to revenge himself on Aerys after he believed Aerys did this with him? I'm not saying this is correct but it makes sense of four things: Tywin fucking Shae, Joffrey and Viserys's startlingly similar personalities (wondered about this long before wondering about parentage), why Tywin made sure Rhaenys and Aegon were killed but later never went after Viserys, and the very long build up of Aerys's humiliation of Tywin culminating in taking his heir for the KG so his own son Tyrion would inherit Casterly Rock, and Tywin doing the same right back with even higher stakes - Tywin's son Viserys as the sole Targaryan heir of Westeros if Robert didn't marry Cersei. Murdering the children makes sense in that context. The man always had a back up plan. He always won. Joke's on Aerys.

Just a fun theory but one I wouldn't mind being true.

 

Rhaella was so closely guarded by Aerys that I doubt any man had any change of getting near her. And Rhaella was said to be mindful of her duty and she did not have anything truly going on with Bonnifer so I suspect she would not want to. As for Tywin, I feel he might have felt he never got a real change for revenge against Aerys for what happened to Joanna because he still felt the need to essentially have his revenge directed to having Tysha raped and sleeping with Shae. 

 

I have been thinking if Joanna was raped or if there was a an affair. If it was an affair her keeping Tyrion would make more sense and Tywin could have become really bitter and cynical as result of founding this out. And I kind of do not want any more women in the series raped. But Tywin has this rape obsession (but I guess this could also be a result of the affair or maybe Tywin did not truly know what happened like we do not), Aerys's behavior was so appealing and I do not want Joanna and him to have an affair either since I kind of like Tywin and Joanna as an couple (there are so few happy couples in the series).

[Mithras]

In this regard you are only looking at the positive or the benevolent aspects of fatherhood. Not all fatherhood experiences are positive and the negative experiences still serve to shape the future man. Theon's current predicament is the result of some rather negative fatherly influences on Balon's part. Randyll Tarly is very much a father to Sam in that he shaped Sam into the man that he is today. Sam's struggle is to overcome the negative legacy his father left him with but that doesn't make Randyll any less the father who raised and shaped Sam. Cersei's maternal influence on Joffrey is a huge part of what makes him the monumental ass that he is (well thankfully was.) That influence is hardly the benevolent archetypal maternal role we associate with nurturing and comfort, but it is the parental hand that shaped the child nonetheless.

 

Tyrion is character that both hates Tywin and yet desperately struggles for his approval. He models himself after Tywin while at the same time trying-- and often failing-- to be different. No one ever mistook Tyrion for being Gerion writ small. Tyrion never thinks, "Hey what would Gerion do here?" Tyrion doesn't dream of being a pirate and making his father and sister walk the plank. Genna never says, "Hey that Tyrion is so much like Gerion." Kindness and fatherhood are not synonymous and kindness from Gerion is not what shaped Tyrion into the character we see on the page.

 

I did not mean to deny Tywin’s influence on Tyrion. I wanted to say that Aerys is simply a non-person for Tyrion where Gerion qualifies as a father figure. In terms of family dynamics, Aerys does not count for Tyrion but Gerion certainly does.

 

Yes, Genna said that Tyrion is Tywin writ small but I don’t think that is the whole truth. Tyrion is Tywin and Gerion writ small. Remember what Genna told about Gerion previously in that dialogue?

 

“It has been hard for Kevan, living all his life in Tywin’s shadow. It was hard for all my brothers. That shadow Tywin cast was long and black, and each of them had to struggle to find a little sun. Tygett tried to be his own man, but he could never match your father, and that just made him angrier as the years went by. Gerion made japes. Better to mock the game than to play and lose. But Kevan saw how things stood early on, so he made himself a place by your father’s side.”

 

Now, who else makes use of japes and witty humor to struggle with Tywin’s shadow, even long after his death?

 

“He [Tywin] was not the same man after she [Joanna] died Imp,” Uncle Gery had told him once. “The best part of him died with her.” Gerion had been the youngest of Lord Tytos Lannister's four sons and the uncle Tyrion liked best. But he was gone now, lost beyond the seas.

 

His Uncle Gerion thought that was the funniest thing he had ever heard [Tyrion asking for a dragon little like he was].

 

His Uncle Gerion set him on tables at feasts to recite them.

 

Back then his uncle Gerion had been on hand to praise his efforts, in place of surly sailors.

 

I think what Gerion represented for Tyrion is more than merely a jolly uncle. As a character influence, Gerion is the one responsible for Tyrion’s use of japes as armor. Gerion used that against Tywin for a long time. And for the record, Tyrion desperately wanted to go with Gerion in his voyage.

[Ragnorak]

 

I did not mean to deny Tywin’s influence on Tyrion. I wanted to say that Aerys is simply a non-person for Tyrion where Gerion qualifies as a father figure. In terms of family dynamics, Aerys does not count for Tyrion but Gerion certainly does.

 

Yes, Genna said that Tyrion is Tywin writ small but I don’t think that is the whole truth. Tyrion is Tywin and Gerion writ small. Remember what Genna told about Gerion previously in that dialogue?

 

“It has been hard for Kevan, living all his life in Tywin’s shadow. It was hard for all my brothers. That shadow Tywin cast was long and black, and each of them had to struggle to find a little sun. Tygett tried to be his own man, but he could never match your father, and that just made him angrier as the years went by. Gerion made japes. Better to mock the game than to play and lose. But Kevan saw how things stood early on, so he made himself a place by your father’s side.”

 

Now, who else makes use of japes and witty humor to struggle with Tywin’s shadow, even long after his death?

 

“He [Tywin] was not the same man after she [Joanna] died Imp,” Uncle Gery had told him once. “The best part of him died with her.” Gerion had been the youngest of Lord Tytos Lannister's four sons and the uncle Tyrion liked best. But he was gone now, lost beyond the seas.

 

His Uncle Gerion thought that was the funniest thing he had ever heard [Tyrion asking for a dragon little like he was].

 

His Uncle Gerion set him on tables at feasts to recite them.

 

Back then his uncle Gerion had been on hand to praise his efforts, in place of surly sailors.

 

I think what Gerion represented for Tyrion is more than merely a jolly uncle. As a character influence, Gerion is the one responsible for Tyrion’s use of japes as armor. Gerion used that against Tywin for a long time. And for the record, Tyrion desperately wanted to go with Gerion in his voyage.

 

I am honestly confused about the whole Gerion issue. Yes, Gerion was a nice uncle. Yes, he was kind to Tyrion. His father was Tytos who was a very kind and jovial man so this even makes sense.

 

The books are filled with minor foster father figures. Yoren rescues Arya because he believes himself to be an uncle of sorts. He tells Ned Benjen is his brother which makes Ned his brother as well-- and by extension Arya his niece. Mormont is a foster father to Jon. The Halfhand is a foster father for Jon. Luwin is a foster father to all the Stark children to one degree or another. Gerion serves as a minor foster father figure to Tyrion which is basically the role uncles and grandfathers are supposed to play in life.  And the point is...?

[Lord Varys]

I say Tygett was Tyrion's father.