A Dragon did wake from Stone and She has Three heads and Her name is Daenerys Targaryen

[khal drogon]

47 minutes ago, teej6 said:

But unlike Benerro and Aemon declaring that AA is Dany, Melisandre does not declare or even realize that AA is Jon. We don't have any indication that she thinks anyone other than Stannis could be AA. And we have her POV. She is more annoyed that she sees Jon when she asks for a glimpse of AA or Stannis in her mind. 

She doesn't realise it. But Martin wants us to think of Jon as a candidate nevertheless by that line. Then he gets more literal with a dream of him fighting the others with a flaming sword. He definitely wants us to think of him of as a candidate otherwise he wouldn't have written the dream sequence. So if you are looking for a surprisingly reveal then AA cannot be Jon Snow or Dany. If the show is any indication there you see both of them getting declared as the "one who was promised" almost at the same time(Dany later than Jon). And I don't think the show will have different AA. So does that mean both are red herrings? I don't think so.

[teej6]

On February 11, 2016 at 0:42 PM, Myself656 said:

Well, like I said, I think the twist will be that she's a Dark Messiah of the "Utopia justifies the means variety." She loves widows and orphans but isn't afraid of making a whole lot more of them if people get in the way of her goals.

And I agree... I don't think Jon is a fit for AA/TPTWP/TSWMTW at all. If he's a prophetic character at all (he could end up being The Unchosen One), he's probably more in The Last Hero mold... the person not looking for war, but a way to end it... or he's a Noah type figure who gathers and preserves what he can of mankind to ride out the apocalypse and then rebuild the world once it has past.

My money would be on Last Hero figure, because there's something suitably deconstructive about a male figure being the one looking for a peaceful solution while a female figure is the one ready to spill Fire and Blood down on the world.

Yes, the red priests interpretation of AA is very militant like and just like any other cult they see AA as a champion of their faith who will fight (wage war) for their faith and cause. We don't know how the other red priests view other faiths but Mel, for example, seems to be very dismissive and intolerant of other faiths and beliefs. In a Tyrion ADWD chapter, Haldon tells him that Bennero said this of Dany: "Benerro has sent forth the word from Volantis. Her coming is the fulfillment of an ancient prophecy... She is Azor Ahai returned … and her triumph over darkness will bring a summer that will never end … death itself will bend its knee, and all those who die fighting in her cause shall be reborn …” The bolded part shows a very militant savior and her followers in choosing martyrdom will be reborn. Not a faith or philosophy that espouses peace. 

You mentioned the Noah's ark story which has its origins in Mesopotamian myth (an apocalyptic flood) long before it appears in the Genesis narrative. Similarly, perhaps the the legend/prophesy of AA, tPtwP, the Last Hero all have a common root way back in the past. Over the years, this common tale was corrupted so as to suit/fit the religions/beliefs/philosophies of different peoples/societies in Planetos 

[teej6]

8 minutes ago, khal drogon said:

She doesn't realise it. But Martin wants us to think of Jon as a candidate nevertheless by that line. Then he gets more literal with a dream of him fighting the others with a flaming sword. He definitely wants us to think of him of as a candidate otherwise he wouldn't have written the dream sequence. So if you are looking for a surprisingly reveal then AA cannot be Jon Snow or Dany. If the show is any indication there you see both of them getting declared as the "one who was promised" almost at the same time(Dany later than Jon). And I don't think the show will have different AA. So does that mean both are red herrings? I don't think so.

I wouldn't rely on any of D&D's material. Again, Mel seeing Jon in her flames or Jon having a dream of fighting with a flaming sword in hand is not the same as Benerro openly declaring Dany is AA. The evidence for Jon can be seen as hints (agreed not subtle). On the other hand, the evidence for Dany as AA hits the reader on the head, which looks like a red herring to me. 

[khal drogon]

19 minutes ago, teej6 said:

I wouldn't rely on any of D&D's material. Again, Mel seeing Jon in her flames or Jon having a dream of fighting with a flaming sword in hand is not the same as Benerro openly declaring Dany is AA. The evidence for Jon can be seen as hints (agreed not subtle). On the other hand, the evidence for Dany as AA hits the reader on the head, which looks like red herring to me. 

Yes. But Jon's not so subtle hints put him in the red herring territory. We are not looking for a warrior with a literal flaming sword from the story. By associating that symbolism with him makes me think he could be a red herring the same way as Stannis. Literal flaming sword screams falseness. But I think both Jon and Dany are kind of AA but it will play out in a different way.

[Drogonthedread]

11 hours ago, TheWhiteDevil said:

That is a fantastic work, OP. The research is all inclusive and detailed, I will have to read it more than once to get all of it.

I love how the number 3 happens to be so relevant in Daenerys's storyline. 

Mother of Three, Child of Three, fulfilling 3 prophecies.

I fail to understand those that claim Daenerys to be a Red Herring, her storyline is so beautifully crafter  and epic that to build something like that with no pay off would be like revealing Jon to be Ned's, except worse because we are not talking paternity here but journeys.

Stannis is a RH. Obviously.I love how people that have not read the books too deeply, immediately think about Jon as the perfect candidate to fulfil all prophecies, expecially after they learn about R+L=J.  iIt is not surprising, as it is usually the hidden "prince" the one to rise up to destiny. It is a trope and that is where the mind is used to go.

Except in this case the prophecy has been fulfilled by the end of book one. When there still wasn't any prophecy to fulfil, for my perspective this kind of writing structure is absolutely amazing.

Daenerys's journey is mysterious, ripe with secrets to uncover and conditions to meet. It has an epic quality other characters lack. Which does not make them less important, just different, take Arya's journey, her journey is ferocious and dehumanizing, she get colder than ice and sharp like a weapon, all edges. Sansa's journey is a labyrinth, walls made of lies and tricks, fake smiles, fake tears, while she acquires the knowledge and the means to play the game. Jon's journey is a long discovery, he explores the world and himself, struggling between desire, duty and guilt. Always feeling as it is sinful for him to desire, yet he rise in spite of destiny, birth and his induced guilt. Bran's journey is a constant "leap" and yet he cannot move.

These are just my views obviously. I do not claim them to be rappresentative of anything but me.

What I loved the most about the OP is that all research is rooted in the text. No crazy theories, no leaps, just research and documentation. 

I love so much that Daenerys is mentioned in the same context of the prophecy by Maester Aemon, in the fourth book, no less. On the final rush. I think it was an amazing moment of connection, every time I read it I get chills, It downed on me when it dawned on him. I must admit I missed all clues and signs before Maester Aemon spoke. Why did I miss them? Because they are woved so tightly into the fabric of Daeneris's story they were hard to detect.

I disagree on whoever claim Daenerys to be the obvious choice. She obviously is not as so many people claim her to be a "fraud"  or an attempt made by George to mislead the readers, there is no way in the world for "an attempt" to be written so beautifully and with such care.

Iam glad you liked ..and completely agree with your posts as well..

I honestly dont care about those who say she is obvious ...whats the most irritating thing is these are same people who endured the obvious arguments against RLJ thread ..

I have yet to see any one who come up with a valid arguments to disprove this theory where dany as AAr /TpTWP other than saying Its obvious ad. Red herring . 

If she was red herring why so much clues in the fifth book..

If say the foreshadowing of tale read by jon and dany at astopor was associated with jon in any way then people would have been calling that as the clear evidence he is AAr ..

Butsince its about dany its not even spoken about till this thread created. ..

And i won't even call Master aemon telling dany as TPTWp as fourth book. ..I view both AFFc and AdwD as same books... So aemon and moqqoro calling dany happens at end of fifth book..

For all the talk of dany being literal people forget jon is more literal like flaming sword and literal ice and fire ..

5 hours ago, teej6 said:

But unlike Benerro and Aemon declaring that AA is Dany, Melisandre does not declare or even realize that AA is Jon. We don't have any indication that she thinks anyone other than Stannis could be AA. And we have her POV. She is more annoyed that she sees Jon when she asks for a glimpse of AA or Stannis in her mind. 

So its alright to be called as AAr straight to his face in start of sixth book but its not alright that calling dany as AAr at the end of book 5 not even straight to her face ..

Just what do you think will happen when Mel resurrects him .. R u telling me she won't be calling jon as AAr ..

And no I have been using this argument even before start of season 6 and show does not change my arguments any less ..

 

Dany fulfilled in the books and show but jon only in fan theories ..

Will jon become AAr ..he may become one..

But how does that make dany as red herring ...if anything it means jon joins dany ..

[Drogonthedread]

7 hours ago, teej6 said:

Martin by his own admission does not "plan and set everything up." He has on several occasions described his writing style as that of a gardener who develops the story as it progresses and does not have everything planned out unlike some one like Tolkien.

Are you telling me martin didn't plan Dany hatching dragons and RLJ or dany and tyrion meeting..

 

[teej6]

2 hours ago, Drogonthedread said:

Are you telling me martin didn't plan Dany hatching dragons and RLJ or dany and tyrion meeting..

 

If you've read the books you'll know that Dany and Tyrion have not met and there's no guarantee that they will. It's amazing how people confuse the show for the books. And yes, I am telling you that Martin has mentioned several times that he does not plan entire plot points in advance. Does he have ideas? Yes he does.  But the details and plot come as he writes. That's is his style of writing, which he describes as being like a gardner and not an architect (planning) like Tolkien. And FYI the finding of the wolves was GRRM's initial idea and not dragons. In fact, Martin wasn't sure he wanted to include dragons initially. They were supposed to be only the heraldic symbol of House Targaryen and there wasn't to be real fire breathing dragons in the books. He was convinced by Phyllis Eisenstein (author and his friend) to include dragons. 

[Drogonthedread]

4 minutes ago, teej6 said:

If you've read the books you'll know that Dany and Tyrion have not met and there's no guarantee that they will. It's amazing how people confuse the show for the books. And yes, I am telling you that Martin has mentioned several times that he does not plan entire plot points in advance. Does he have ideas? Yes he does.  But the details and plot come as he writes. That's is his style of writing, which he describes as being like a gardner and not an architect (planning) like Tolkien. And FYI the finding of the wolves was GRRM's initial idea and not dragons. In fact, Martin wasn't sure he wanted to include dragons initially. They were supposed to be only the heraldic symbol of House Targaryen and there wasn't to be real fire breathing dragons in the books. He was convinced by Phyllis Eisenstein (author and his friend) to include dragons. 

 

 

 

Lol did I say they they already meet in the books..

So this is how you respond out of all the arguments you take that one to nitpick.. 

you don't need the show tell that dany and tyrion are going to meet ..he also said in interview about them coming together for a time..

You don't need the show to tell that dany will come to westeros..GRRM has planned dany conquering westeros all along. .

About dragons. .you do realize that he was thinking about giving the targs fire wielding power and instead changed them into dragons..

So targs have always destined to have some power just not fire wielding but dragon riding...

How about RLJ why you don't speak about that ..

Or about the letter of martin in which he had dragon and jon having secret parentage ..

The key points always had been there just how to get from there ..

he also has said many times he know the end game for most of players ..

Dany being AAr/TpWp is like you say a detail which Grrm will improve and plot as he goes along ..

How about actually discrediting than saying red herring and obvious...

[TheWhiteDevil]

I never thought about AFfC and ADwD being a singular book but it actually is. That moves Daenerys's "revelation" two books before the end. Although I think her journey has been taking place throughout all the books, step by step, a bit at a time, which is why I love it so much .

Truly masterful storytelling, to build to something so steadily and quietly. This is why I always dismiss the RH argument, no writer would waste such thing for a "twist" moment. Obviously I have no idea what George is planning, I 'm speaking from a reader perspective.

No connection is made between AA and Dani until Master Aemon made it and sadly I only figured out how perfectly she fulfilled the prophecy after Maester Aemon spoke.

I do think there are double standard and bias at play when Daenerys is involved, personally I'm quite fond of her as a literary creation and as a character, I always try to set my bias aside.

I probably fail at that.

However the OP is rooted in the text and "wields" text as proof, to challenge it properly text must be wielded back. 

i have yet to see that.

[Drogonthedread]

21 minutes ago, TheWhiteDevil said:

I never thought about AFfC and ADwD being a singular book but it actually is. That moves Daenerys's "revelation" two books before the end. Although I think her journey has been taking place throughout all the books, step by step, a bit at a time, which is why I love it so much .

Truly masterful storytelling, to build to something so steadily and quietly. This is why I always dismiss the RH argument, no writer would waste such thing for a "twist" moment. Obviously I have no idea what George is planning, I 'm speaking from a reader perspective.

No connection is made between AA and Dani until Master Aemon made it and sadly I only figured out how perfectly she fulfilled the prophecy after Maester Aemon spoke.

I do think there are double standard and bias at play when Daenerys is involved, personally I'm quite fond of her as a literary creation and as a character, I always try to set my bias aside.

I probably fail at that.

However the OP is rooted in the text and "wields" text as proof, to challenge it properly text must be wielded back. 

i have yet to see that.

 

 

Thank you for this post ..

Grrm had said characters actions make them heroes and their decisions ....

Dragons used to enslave a whole continent now the same dragons are used by a girl to free those who are enslaved ..dany above all else is a saviour and works for the people better lives and thinks that's her duty as a queen..

This pretty much puts her into hero by decision and action...however she had made some mistake and imperfect on the way( how can one be not)...but she is willing to learn and a quick learner..so she will improve 

[Fire Eater]

On 7/20/2016 at 11:57 PM, khal drogon said:

Yes. But Jon's not so subtle hints put him in the red herring territory. We are not looking for a warrior with a literal flaming sword from the story. By associating that symbolism with him makes me think he could be a red herring the same way as Stannis. Literal flaming sword screams falseness. But I think both Jon and Dany are kind of AA but it will play out in a different way.

No, it doesn't make him a red herring because no one is explicitly declaring him as AA. The flaming sword is in a single dream he has, and no one even calls him AA in that dream nor does Jon think if himself as AA. GRRM is very explicit with red herrings like Tyrion being the one who sent the footpad, and the Lannisters being the ones who killed Jon Arryn. No one outright says Jon is AA so he isn't a red herring in the way GRRM uses it. 

[IceFire125]

1 hour ago, Fire Eater said:

No, it doesn't make him a red herring because no one is explicitly declaring him as AA. The flaming sword is in a single dream he has, and no one even calls him AA in that dream nor does Jon think if himself as AA. GRRM is very explicit with red herrings like Tyrion being the one who sent the footpad, and the Lannisters being the ones who killed Jon Arryn. No one outright says Jon is AA so he isn't a red herring in the way GRRM uses it. 

And GRRM continue to have Jon to flatly deny it.  He denies many times that he has royal blood.  He denies there's such thing as a promised one. 

"That’s the way prophecies come true in unexpected ways. The more you try to avoid them, the more you are making them true, and I make a little fun with that." - GRRM

 

[TheWhiteDevil]

On 21 July 2016 at 3:33 PM, Drogonthedread said:

Thank you for this post ..

Grrm had said characters actions make them heroes and their decisions ....

Dragons used to enslave a whole continent now the same dragons are used by a girl to free those who are enslaved ..dany above all else is a saviour and works for the people better lives and thinks that's her duty as a queen..

This pretty much puts her into hero by decision and action...however she had made some mistake and imperfect on the way( how can one be not)...but she is willing to learn and a quick learner..so she will improve 

Agree. Daenerys is far from perfect which I love. Her inner world is very dynamic though, even when she was stuck in Mereen, not the most exciting part of her journey but essential for the character development, imo.

I agree she is a hero by choice, each step she takes is by her own will, except for the very beginning of the story, she remains in Meeren by her own choice. She isn't a reluctant hero (which I love as the reluctant her trope is annoying), or a circumstantial one. 

She build her destiny and takes it in stride, this is so refreshing.

[TheWhiteDevil]

My concept of Red Herring is very different, now I'm probably wrong but I think that a Red Herring is meant to induce the reader to believe something.

It doesn't always involve a character's statement, for instance, a subplot could induce the reader to think or believe something, so could a remark in the narrative, a character's position in the story and so on. Ned dying was a shock because characters in his role and position rarely dies, in this case the essence of Ned's character was the RH.

It isn't just about stating something. 

There are no fixed rules in this regard. We can try to guess patterns and parallels but those  very patterns and parallel may be in place to create a Red Herring as well. Especially in George's case since he admitted to be a "gardener" which make guessing incredibly difficult.

Same with foreshadowing, anything and everything can be turned into foreshadowing with the right lens. In most cases, only after a book is over is possible to make a case for it.

[Drogonthedread]

The more you try to avoid them ,the more you are making them true..

GRRM

Are people really kidding me with this quote and use it to defend jon's case..

Let's see how much rhaegar and lyanna wanted to avoid having a baby ..

Last time I checked dany and dragons are reborn and  born because MMD was trying to avoid the birth of promised prince.  

And people act like only dany and jon is in the story..

You know there is actually character called cersei and she who tries to avoid prophecies keep on self fulfilling it. 

Jon snow's entire parentage means that Rhaegar correctly guessed he will be chosen one and made sure he had a baby with lyanna..what are you going to call that. .

Conpare that with no one looking for a girl..

And speaking about denying the royal blood and chosen one...iam sorry does he already comes to know about his parentage  or does people call him chosen one so he denies that...and he does not deny chosen one but questions that Mel is wrong and doubts stannis is the one..

The conversation with Mel where he thinks that Mel should be wrong because stannis was only lord of dragon stone and not born there...unlike jon we do know who was born there..

Speaking of denying blood.  Do you guys know who spent one whole books denying her blood and family and dragons only to be remembered and embrace it again at the end of the books..

 

About called out as AAR ...iam still hoping for an answer what happens when Mel calls jon as AAr or TpTWP straight to his face after he resurrected .....will the same guys tell me then that means he is red herring too..

I know what will be the reaction then when TWOW comes out...people will ignore that Mel calls him out staright to his face and keep pulling their hairs at finding a salt and smoke and bleeding and star and sword reference..

[Jon's Queen Consort]

14 hours ago, Fire Eater said:

No, it doesn't make him a red herring because no one is explicitly declaring him as AA. The flaming sword is in a single dream he has, and no one even calls him AA in that dream nor does Jon think if himself as AA. GRRM is very explicit with red herrings like Tyrion being the one who sent the footpad, and the Lannisters being the ones who killed Jon Arryn. No one outright says Jon is AA so he isn't a red herring in the way GRRM uses it. 

I have to ask you a very sincere question; Why do you even bother? Don't you see what this thread actually is?

[El Guapo]

5 hours ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

I have to ask you a very sincere question; Why do you even bother? Don't you see what this thread actually is?

 

A discussion about a character in the books and about whether or not she fits a prophecy from the books using quotes found in those very same books to back up the theory.  The nerve of someone creating a thread about the books on this forum.

[TheWhiteDevil]

1 hour ago, El Guapo said:

 

A discussion about a character in the books and about whether or not she fits a prophecy from the books using quotes found in those very same books to back up the theory.  The nerve of someone creating a thread about the books on this forum.

I agree. I love this thread. I think the OP did an amazing job, researching and linking and I love how everything the OP states is rooted in the text. It is very concrete and real.  

I thank the OP for making this thread.

[The Commentator]

On 2/2/2016 at 0:49 AM, Drogonthedread said:

 

 

 

A Dragon did wake from stone and her name is Daenerys stormborn  and she has three heads

 

Who is this bloody savior?” “A dragon.” The cheesemonger saw the look on his face at that, and laughed. “A dragon with three heads.”    

 

 

I believe Dany is Azor Ahai and the Three-Headed Dragon.  Azor Ahai because she woke dragons from stone, a feat that no one else has been able to do.  Three-Headed Dragon, for obvious reasons.

Where I differ is in the Prince That Was Promised.  I think this is Drogon.  I am basing this on arguments made by Franklin VI on this very forum last year.  Drogon and Prince Rhaego traded places.  Drogon is the son of a Khal/King and a Queen.  That makes him a true prince.  He is the dragon that many Targaryens have been trying to hatch since the days of Aegon V.  He is the dragon that they were hoping to birth at Summerhall. 

[Drogonthedread]

12 hours ago, El Guapo said:

 

A discussion about a character in the books and about whether or not she fits a prophecy from the books using quotes found in those very same books to back up the theory.  The nerve of someone creating a thread about the books on this forum.

Well how dare someone can create a thread on any one other than jon..

For what its worth we dont go on calling a character red herring and obvious and keep ignoring the five books of clues and foreshadowimgs..

If the only arguments is red herring and she is obvious and she can't be because she is a villain and not a good one... Then that says lots about the bias..

And iam still looking for anyvalid arguments against what happens if Mel calls out Jon straight to his face ..