Heresy 188

[Black Crow]

13 minutes ago, Tucu said:

Without a pact to preserve life, the fanatics of the winning side will implement one of two apocalypses: an eternal darkness or the summer than never ends (where everyone is burn alive to be reborn).

So both sides need to lose for life to continue.

Rather comes back to what I said about the King of Winter bridling it rather than leading it. While a climactic battle at Winterfell is certainly promised, the outcome cannot see Jon Snow and Danaerys Targaryen combining or even marrying to defeat Ice and so usher in that deadly summer that never ends. They might on the other hand end up killing each other, but I'd be more inclined to see both Ice and Fire lose, or rather be brought under control and separated by their respective "champions".

As to the "everyone" being burnt alive to be reborn in the event of Fire winning the day - alas no. That's only for the elect.

[Tucu]

Melisandre doesn't seem to think that there is an opt-out; people choose darkness or light. Those that choose darkness will burn during the war; those that choose light will burn to be reborn.

"We all must choose," she proclaimed. "Man or woman, young or old, lord or peasant, our choices are the same." Her voice made Jon Snow think of anise and nutmeg and cloves. She stood at the king's side on a wooden scaffold raised above the pit. "We choose light or we choose darkness. We choose good or we choose evil. We choose the true god or the false."

Edit: I agree that the Kings of Winter could be a cerberus containing the forces of Ice.

[Matthew.]

3 hours ago, Black Crow said:

...in marked contrast to his often talking to the boys about Ser Arthur Dayne, the finest knight in christendom

This is an idea that is often repeated in AD+L discussions, yet it is not actually demonstrated in the text. All we have is a memory from Bran of him asking Eddard who was the greatest knight, and Eddard giving the whole "Arthur Dayne was the bestest, and would have killed me if not for Howland Reed" speech...and that's it.

Arthur Dayne himself is only barely mentioned throughout the first two novels (only once in aCoK, in fact). Eddard, for example, only thinks of him once as a figure defeated by Rhaegar at Harrenhal, and then again during the ToJ dream. He doesn't exactly loom large in the narrative, and there's definitely not any evidence that Eddard spoke of him "often." Which isn't to say he didn't necessarily speak of him often, but this is an overly generous interpretation of the information we actually have.

[The Snowfyre Chorus]

4 hours ago, Black Crow said:

Always worth remembering in this context that at one point Ned notes that he hasn't thought about Rhaegar in years - in marked contrast to his often talking to the boys about Ser Arthur Dayne, the finest knight in christendom

Well, it could be that he confuses or conflates the two. Says one, means the other, you know?  Prince Charming, the Knight in Shining Armor... those Disney princes all look the same, after a while.     

(Though somehow my daughter always seems capable of telling them apart.  Huh.   )

[Muttering Ed]

7 hours ago, Sly Wren said:

First up, welcome, welcome!

Second up--we should probably avoid too much show talk, but I agree with you.

Third up, if we go to the books, there's a fair amount of Sword of the Morning imagery around Jon and connections between the Starks and Daynes in general.

As for the tower of joy--the books give us 4 accounts of that fight in Game and Clash. In 3 out of 4, the only combatants mentioned are Ned and Arthur--as though the books are telling us that something about their fight mattered more. Clash really drives it home when Bran notes how sad Ned is when taking about Arthur's death.

And in Ned's dream of the lead up to the fight, only Arthur gets emotion from Ned--Ned speaks to him sadly. And the last thing Ned sees before "they came together in a rush of steel and shadow" is Arthur, holding his fabulous sword aloft. 

So, show or no, seems like there's a good chancethe books are likely telling us that the ultimate significance of the fight was between Arthur and Ned. And that would all make a LOT of sense if Arthur was Lyanna's lover and the father of her child.

First... thanks!  I'm just happy to be here.

Second... I know. Just couldn't resist.

Third... Not sure I'm convinced by Ned's sadness. Ned is a fairly morose guy anyway, plus I get the impression he spends a lot of time in prayer and reflection before the Old Gods each time he kills someone. And since Arthur seems to be an admirable dude, Ned probably has deep respect if not almost reverence for him. I could see Ned being quite sad about having killed this legendary warrior without any other complications like Arthur fathering Jon.

I agree about the Sword of the Morning imagery around young Jon, and that there does seem to be some connection between the Starks & Daynes. At the moment though it's not enough to sway me away from seeing Rhaegar as the papa. I'm more persuaded that the imagery foreshadows Jon being deemed a Sword of the Morning candidate in the future. Perhaps the Daynes actually knew the secret and view Rhaegar's son as a prince who may prove worthy of wielding Dawn. Perhaps they agreed with (or convinced) Ned to protect Jon up north where presumably he'd be safer, since Arthur and Rhaegar were such boon companions and Ned was on the winning side of the rebellion. Note there are lots of "perhaps" in all that speculation.

[Black Crow]

8 hours ago, Muttering Ed said:

Not sure I'm convinced by Ned's sadness. Ned is a fairly morose guy anyway, plus I get the impression he spends a lot of time in prayer and reflection before the Old Gods each time he kills someone. And since Arthur seems to be an admirable dude, Ned probably has deep respect if not almost reverence for him. I could see Ned being quite sad about having killed this legendary warrior without any other complications like Arthur fathering Jon.

Its also worth remembering that the dream is not just a fever dream but Ned projecting himself backwards. Was he always so solemn. He may not necessarily have been so back in the day, but learning after the deed that you've slain your sister's lover and the father of your nephew is just the sort of thing to bring about an abiding guilt and sadness.

[Matthew.]

If that fight in front of the ToJ had gone another way, that was going to make for one awkward conversation between AD and Lyanna.

"Sorry love, I really had no choice but to murder your brother. After all, a dead guy from an obsolete regime ordered me to stand in front of a tower, and you know what a stickler I am about my vows--except that vow of chastity, of course. *wink*"

[Black Crow]

"Didn't have any choice, not the way he was ranting on about you dishonouring the family and waving that big sword of his..."

[Tucu]

"But we are in a tower!; did you try holding the door?"

[Mace Cooterian]

"Close the door.  Close the door.  Close door....Close door....Clodor...Clodor....."

[Tucu]

6 minutes ago, Mace Cooterian said:

"Close the door.  Close the door.  Close door....Close door....Clodor...Clodor....."

Fixed. Hodor's true story is that he was a greenseer candidate that watched the events of The Tower of Joy and was driven into madness by the tactics of Hightower and Dayne.

[Black Crow]

Heresy, heresy! How can you make jokes about something of such paramount importance as the nativity of Jon Targaryen!

Shame Shame...

[wolfmaid7]

On 7/6/2016 at 7:08 AM, Sly Wren said:

 

As for the tower of joy--the books give us 4 accounts of that fight in Game and Clash. In 3 out of 4, the only combatants mentioned are Ned and Arthur--as though the books are telling us that something about their fight mattered more. Clash really drives it home when Bran notes how sad Ned is when taking about Arthur's death.

And in Ned's dream of the lead up to the fight, only Arthur gets emotion from Ned--Ned speaks to him sadly. And the last thing Ned sees before "they came together in a rush of steel and shadow" is Arthur, holding his fabulous sword aloft. 

So, show or no, seems like there's a good chancethe books are likely telling us that the ultimate significance of the fight was between Arthur and Ned. And that would all make a LOT of sense if Arthur was Lyanna's lover and the father of her child.

When it comes to Ned's and Arthur's emotions toward each other i think it could be as simple as sadness on what could have been.I'm speaking ofcourse of Ashara and Ned.Whatever,did or didn't happen between Ned and Ashara something along the lines of if things had gone a different way we could have been brothers by marriage.That could very well be the reason for the sadness vs a relationship that in all fairness Sly doesn't have a foundation that specfic to Lyanna and Arthur.

On 7/6/2016 at 8:19 AM, Sly Wren said:

 

Robert wants to kill Targaryens because they are related to Rhaegar--the man who took his love from him. He wants to kill them all until they are as dead as their dragons and then piss on their graves (Roberts words in Game, Eddard II). He does not want them dead for political expediency--only gets riled up about killing when he thinks of Rhaegar.

And Ned very clearly thinks in Game, Eddard II that Robert's hatred of Targs is a madness with him. When Robert starks talking politics, Ned calms down. But when Robert is talking about hating Rhaegar's relatives, Ned gets very worried and angry and has to work to keep his temper.

In Ned's mind, Robert would kill anyone related to the man who took his love from him. Regardless of the surname. That's most likely why Ned lies about Jon. And that holds whether the father is Rhaegar, Arthur, or assistant stable boy #4. 

 

Robert is very good at huffing and puffing something Ned knows to well by making sure to tell Robert he is no Tywin.This arguement that Robert woud kill a child of Lyanna to ignores one important aspect and that's equating the resemblance to a child to their progeny.Jon looks like a Stark,no he is a Stark in a lot of ways.That fact alone is going to stay Robert's hand if he found out as Jon grew.

Let's say he found out when Jon nwas a baby the fact would still remain he risks loosing Ned and that's something he would not do.Robert always knew where Dany and Viserys were.He knew it well enough to identify that they were living in the home of a Cheesemonger.If Robert wanted to kill Dany and Viserys  he would have.There would be no shortage of someone willing to do the deed for money.

Here's my problem with the singling out Robert as the big bad Jon was being protected from because he's kill him.

"Ned has always been fiercely protective of Jon."

Indicating that Ned had a general attituide towards Jon's safety,yet he sent Jon to the Wall after hearing from Benjen the problems posed by Mance and the Wildlings.

Maybe he reconcilled this by rationalizing Benjen would look after him but the Wall was still dangerous.All of this tells me Ned and only Ned decided what protecting Jon looked like and it wasn't a single thing but whatever he decided would be a threat.

I ofcourse think the reason why he never told Robert or anyone else is because Robert's love ,his stubborness would be a threat .I even find it plausible that Ned never told Robert because Robert raped Lyanna while he was drunk i am coming from the arguement that Jon is Robert's son.

On 7/6/2016 at 8:34 AM, Brad Stark said:

I got the impression Robert hated Targaryens and used Lyanna's kidnapping to justify his actions.  I don't think he was ever interested in her.

We do have quotes about Rhegar dying on the Trident for the women he loves.  Unless he was trying to start a war, there was no political reason to kidnap Lyanna.

Nahhh Robert loved Lyanna.She wasn't a passing fancy in his mind,something he never had and was obessive about.It is the one absolute in terms of who loved whom that can't be question.First hand,inside,secondary and tertiary information.Something we don't have with Rhaegar and not with Arthur either.That passing statement from Dany and Selmy is not info,based on fact.t is info based on cultural belief "he stole her,so he must have loved her."

That statement is born from singers romanticizing an event.No one heard Rhaegar say nothing with his crushed in chest amidst clashing swords,sloshing waters and men grunting.

Any way you look at it Rhaegar's "supposed action" (i say this because i believe the poor sod was a scapegoat after the fact and he had nothing to do with Lyanna's disappearence) was an act of chivilry or he behaved like a knave.None of these i believe to be true.

On 7/6/2016 at 10:20 AM, Black Crow said:

Always worth remembering in this context that at one point Ned notes that he hasn't thought about Rhaegar in years - in marked contrast to his often talking to the boys about Ser Arthur Dayne, the finest knight in christendom

Nah BC, Ned spoke to one man often to Jon.

Quote

“The king was a great disappointment to Jon. His father had talked of him often: the peerless Robert Baratheon, demon of the Trident, the fiercest warrior of the realm, a giant among princes."

Ned elevated Robert and his exploits to Jon.This is not a father speaking about his battle exploits to a son,but a friend doing the only thing he could do to let a son know his father without telling him that the guy he was speaking about was his father.

He put Robert above ALL warriors and above ALL Princes

 

[Tucu]

What about "the seed is strong"? Jon Snow doesn't share Robert's black hair and blue eyes.

[Matthew.]

31 minutes ago, wolfmaid7 said:

That passing statement from Dany and Selmy is not info,based on fact.t is info based on cultural belief "he stole her,so he must have loved her."

For Dany, certainly, but for Barristan we have no idea why he believes that Rhaegar loved Lyanna; that could just be because Barristan wanted to believe the best of him, so he put an internal positive spin on events, but it's also possible that he believed this because he was told this by Rhaegar himself.

We can verify from Jaime's POV that Rhaegar returned to the Red Keep and at least had some limited interactions before he rode to the Trident--a battle that Barristan himself rode to along with Rhaegar. This gives them a rather large window of opportunity to speak about recent events.

At the least, I think that makes the whole "Rhaegar was framed" scenario look a lot more implausible, because nobody from either side of RR perceives Rhaegar as a man that was falsely accused, including the people that were about to die for him.

[wolfmaid7]

1 hour ago, Matthew. said:

For Dany, certainly, but for Barristan we have no idea why he believes that Rhaegar loved Lyanna; that could just be because Barristan wanted to believe the best of him, so he put an internal positive spin on events, but it's also possible that he believed this because he was told this by Rhaegar himself.

We can verify from Jaime's POV that Rhaegar returned to the Red Keep and at least had some limited interactions before he rode to the Trident--a battle that Barristan himself rode to along with Rhaegar. This gives them a rather large window of opportunity to speak about recent events.

At the least, I think that makes the whole "Rhaegar was framed" scenario look a lot more implausible, because nobody from either side of RR perceives Rhaegar as a man that was falsely accused, including the people that were about to die for him.

Selmy has has had several interactions with Dany.He has told her of Rhaegar "taking" Lyanna.She asked why would Rhaegar do such a thing.He says he doesn't know because he really doesn't know.He has told Dany a lot of things but he has never said to Dany "Rhaegar said or felt thus about Lyanna" in 5 books this hasn't happen.This is the inside information that is severly lacking.Rhaegar told no one,hasn't mention Lyanna to anyone.Not JonCon,not Selmy not one word or phrase can be attributed to him concerning Lyanna first hand.

As for Rhaegar being framed or not.I won't go so far as that but i will say blaming him for something he had nothing to do with to make a rebellion sound more honorable makes a lot of sense especially is he's dead and can't defend himself.

I am a big proponent because i believe there's ample proof that the kidnapping was a story trumped up after because it sounded more romantic and because it made the rebellion nott look so much like a coup.

Brandon' behavior ,Ned's behavior (2) 

Robert's behavior even Rhaegar,as well as the words and conversations of individual who treated this like a rebellion.No one makes aby mention of Lyanna.They fought because they got paid to fight,people called banners  but the Lyanna stuff was thrown in by the singers and they were the Westrosi version of the Enquire.

[Brad Stark]

The tournament at Harrenhal had a anonymous funding source.  Rheagar won the tournament, defeating his best friend Arthur Dayne, who should have beaten him easily.  Rheagar then ignores his wife and crowns Lyanna his queen of love and beauty.

The whole tournament, including his win was arranged by Rheagar to impress Lyanna.

[wolfmaid7]

36 minutes ago, Brad Stark said:

The tournament at Harrenhal had a anonymous funding source.  Rheagar won the tournament, defeating his best friend Arthur Dayne, who should have beaten him easily.  Rheagar then ignores his wife and crowns Lyanna his queen of love and beauty.

The whole tournament, including his win was arranged by Rheagar to impress Lyanna.

If that was true someone should have told Rhaegar "blue" roses wasn't the way to go because

1.Brandon had to be restrained from kicking his ass.

2. Ned's internal recollection of that action could freeze the balls off a brass monkey. I mean just look at how Ned described that.The Starks percieved an insult in Rhaegar's gesture.

“Ned remembered the moment when all the smiles died, when Prince Rhaegar Targaryen urged his horse past his own wife………….. He could see it still: a crown of winter roses, as blue as frost. Ned Stark reached out his hand to grasp the flowery crown, but beneath the pale blue petals, the thorns lay hidden….. He felt them clawing at his skin, sharp and cruel, saw the slow trickle of blood run down his fingers, and woke……-GoT, pg. 631.

3.Probably one of the most telling actions or ..lack there of came from Lyanna.Rhaegar who didn't make a gesture of respect to her brothers or her bethrothed dropped it in her lap and ....wait for it,Lyanna made no move to handle the crown.She did not touch it.Ned picked it up that much is clear.

If "impressing" Lyanna was his goal he bombed big time.

[Brad Stark]

8 minutes ago, wolfmaid7 said:

If that was true someone should have told Rhaegar "blue" roses wasn't the way to go because

1.Brandon had to be restrained from kicking his ass.

2. Ned's internal recollection of that action could freeze the balls off a brass monkey. I mean just look at how Ned described that.The Starks percieved an insult in Rhaegar's gesture.

“Ned remembered the moment when all the smiles died, when Prince Rhaegar Targaryen urged his horse past his own wife………….. He could see it still: a crown of winter roses, as blue as frost. Ned Stark reached out his hand to grasp the flowery crown, but beneath the pale blue petals, the thorns lay hidden….. He felt them clawing at his skin, sharp and cruel, saw the slow trickle of blood run down his fingers, and woke……-GoT, pg. 631.

 

3.Probably one of the most telling actions or ..lack there of came from Lyanna.Rhaegar who didn't make a gesture of respect to her brothers or her bethrothed dropped it in her lap and ....wait for it,Lyanna made no move to handle the crown.She did not touch it.Ned picked it up that much is clear.

If "impressing" Lyanna was his goal he bombed big time.

Blue winter roses are more evidence Rheagar's win was planned.

I didn't interpret Ned's version the way you did.  I thought flowers with hidden thorns meant something that looked pleasant at first, but had hidden pain.  It led to Rhaegar's death and a war.  This is also Ned's version of events, not meant to be taken literally.  I doubt he actually grasped the crown.

[Matthew.]

5 hours ago, wolfmaid7 said:

Selmy has has had several interactions with Dany.He has told her of Rhaegar "taking" Lyanna.She asked why would Rhaegar do such a thing.He says he doesn't know because he really doesn't know.He has told Dany a lot of things but he has never said to Dany "Rhaegar said or felt thus about Lyanna" in 5 books this hasn't happen.This is the inside information that is severly lacking.Rhaegar told no one,hasn't mention Lyanna to anyone.Not JonCon,not Selmy not one word or phrase can be attributed to him concerning Lyanna first hand.

Nobody recalls a conversation, but Barristan thinks to himself that Rhaegar "loved his Lady Lyanna." It's possible that this was a context formed based on rumor and song, but we also have no evidence that he couldn't have picked it up from Rhaegar either. In that regard his opinion is something of a wash, yet it adds to the existing context of the tournament and other character interpretations, rather than subverting it, and he is theoretically one of the only POVs that would have interacted with Rhaegar directly before his death.

 

 

5 hours ago, wolfmaid7 said:

As for Rhaegar being framed or not.I won't go so far as that but i will say blaming him for something he had nothing to do with to make a rebellion sound more honorable makes a lot of sense especially is he's dead and can't defend himself.

I am a big proponent because i believe there's ample proof that the kidnapping was a story trumped up after because it sounded more romantic and because it made the rebellion nott look so much like a coup.

Jaime's own recollection was that Brandon was outside the Red Keep, calling for Rhaegar to "come out and die" prior to Aerys killing Brandon and Rickard, so we can be reasonably sure Lyanna's abduction wasn't just post war rumor and fabrication.

You're absolutely right that the war wasn't really "about" Lyanna, since that just served to kick off the rebellion that was already brewing. Nonetheless, I must go back to the fact that we have not a shred of information, rumor, or alternative recollection that suggests anything other than the standard "Rhaegar and Lyanna disappear together" version, nothing to suggest Rhaegar is viewed as a man that was falsely accused, even by his supporters.

Beyond a certain point, when we begin speculating that nearly every character interpretation and bit of information is just completely incorrect, the entire reveal becomes convoluted exposition. RLJ, and AD+L to a lesser extent, work because they require very little in-world exposition to fit with things the reader already "knows."

OTOH, if Rhaegar never abducts or runs off with Lyanna, then our entire context for all sorts of things is incorrect, and the in world explanation becomes a mess. Under this scenario, we now need exposition to explain:
1.) Where Lyanna was
2.) Who took her, who started the rumor of her abduction
3.) Why they took her, was she a hostage or a co-conspirator
4.) Where did she die? She was with Eddard, and Eddard mentally links her death to his battle with the KG, and Dorne
5.) Where Rhaegar was 
6.) What he was doing instead of leading the Targaryen forces
7.) Why the KG and Arthur Dayne are in Dorne if they have nothing to do with the Lyanna situation.