Ashara & the mysteries of the Royal Children, explained

[J. Stargaryen]

2 minutes ago, OuttaOldtown said:

I find it unlikely since Arianne seems to know her,

the whole conversation with Arys seems to be suggesting that she was his Paramour for a long period of time and remained with the Martells after he died.

Given that he is Doran's uncle I think its safe to bet he was in KG long before Ashara was even born...

Not necessarily. It suggests that she knows of her. Btw, ever consider that this plays right into those Ashara is alive theories?

No it doesn't.

It's not clear when Lewyn became a KG, but TWoIaF says he came to court with Elia. I asked Elio if he knew when Lewyn became a KG and he replied that GRRM never said. If he became a KG then, I can think of one really great spot to stash a paramour.

[OuttaOldtown]

Just now, J. Stargaryen said:

Not necessarily. It suggests that she knows of her. Btw, ever consider that this plays right into those Ashara is alive theories?

No it doesn't.

It's not clear when Lewyn became a KG, but TWoIaF says he came to court with Elia. I asked Elio if he knew when Lewyn became a KG and he replied that GRRM never said. If he became a KG then, I can think of one really great spot to stash a paramour.

Its possible if you believe she's alive, which I have major doubts, I really got the sense that Arianne's mentioning of her to Arys was much more about Lewyn's remarking that "the sword in a man's hand that determined his worth, not the one between his legs", since half that chapter revolves around his guilt over his affair with Arianne. All we know is it was sometime between 262 AC and the time of Rhaegar and Elia's marriage, if Ashara were present going back as far as the wedding I have doubts that Selmy would've thought that she were new to court..

[Pain killer Jane]

14 hours ago, The Weirwoods Eyes said:

Not nit picking, it bugs me how people just round it down to try to prove Rhaella might not be her mother. I always want to say well a pregnancy actually lasts anywhere from 38-42 weeks sometimes 43 even.  So 8-9 months after the birth of Jon accounts for her having been in the first weeks of her pregnancy on her departure from KL.  

That is very true.

However both Selmy and Viserys said that the Queen was great with child. I trust Selmy's recollection a bit more than Viserys but Viserys was at least 8 and we know that studies show that firm memories are established by at least age 5. He would have been old enough to distinguish between a little bit pregnant and a lot pregnant. But I may be remembering wrong. 

[Voice]

45 minutes ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

This is another piece of conjecture but...

If Lyanna dead of "childbed fever" Jon could not have been more than two weeks old. Puerperal fever tends to strike quickly after childbirth, the most famous example I can recall at the moment being Jane Seymour who died within two weeks of Edward's birth.

If she died of some other kind of fever that changes things but we should remember that with the setting we have she wouldn't have lingered too long with that fever. I'd argue that a non-birth-related fever means she was giving birth or had just given birth while Ned and company were outside fighting, which makes Jon a deal younger.

The 8-9 months does give us something though, if GRRM wasn't being deliberately vague. As the known timeline stands currently, Dany was born exactly nine months after the siege of King's Landing. Still gives us a couple months' leeway because Ned had to learn where Lyanna was and get there, but it narrows things a bit for us. I guess that means we know slightly more than nothing.  

Agreed.

And all your fever scenarios are plausible. I do think it would be a bit too coincidental for Lyanna to be going into labour as Ned is fighting, but it's fantasy. Anything is possible.

 

21 minutes ago, J. Stargaryen said:

The red herrings in these mysteries are Ned is the father, and The Lannisters killed Jon Arryn. RLJ being obvious to lots of hardcore fans twenty years later does not equate it to the Lannisters killed Jon Arryn red herrings.

The obvious answer to Jon's parentage is N+X=J. First Ashara, then Wylla. Because that's what it says in the books. Just like the books claim that the Lannisters killed Jon Arryn. First Cersei, then Tyrion. Notice how in both cases we're given contradictory information that should make us question what we're being told. Yet that info falls within the general parameters of the overall red herring.

I don't disagree. But N+?=J is a red herring for fantasy novices. Experienced fantasy readers will be looking for a hidden prince/king. I believe RLJ is a red herring for them.

Avid fantasy nerds tend to see RLJ immediately, because they are expecting it. Those who are new to fantasy tend to see RLJ only after hearing about it, joining the forum-verse, or upon subsequent rereads.

RLJ is not only obvious to fans after twenty years of forum talk. To the contrary, I've had students who have seen it upon their first read. They were, as is expected, fantasy fiction buffs. Non-fantasy aficionados tend to not even realize that Jon's parentage is at issue. It is a mystery geared toward a very specific audience, and it is an audience and trained behavior that GRRM knows well.

I would like for RLJ to be correct, but I don't think it will be. Having now read many of his other works, I find it even less likely he would settle for the obvious. It isn't his style.

And yes, I do affirm that RLJ is obvious. We may have to agree to disagree on that.

 

21 minutes ago, J. Stargaryen said:

Book-Jon doesn't look Dornish though.

 

He's Dornish-looking enough to pass for Wylla/Ashara's son. And:

 

Quote

"No," Jon Snow said quietly. "It was not courage. This one was dead of fear. You could see it in his eyes, Stark." Jon's eyes were a grey so dark they seemed almost black, but there was little they did not see. He was of an age with Robb, but they did not look alike. Jon was slender where Robb was muscular, dark where Robb was fair, graceful and quick where his half brother was strong and fast.

 

[Ygrain]

3 minutes ago, Voice said:

He's Dornish-looking enough to pass for Wylla/Ashara's son. And:

Ah, BS. He looks like a typical Stark. Nowhere it is mentioned that he is dark for a Stark. He is darkER than Tully-Starks. Because people with auburn hair and blue eyes have fairer skin tone than those with brown hair and dark eyes. It's the same reading comprehension fail as when people claim that Ned was short because he was shortER than Brandon.

[J. Stargaryen]

2 minutes ago, OuttaOldtown said:

Its possible if you believe she's alive, which I have major doubts, I really got the sense that Arianne's mentioning of her to Arys was much more about Lewyn's remarking that "the sword in a man's hand that determined his worth, not the one between his legs", since half that chapter revolves around his guilt over his affair with Arianne. All we know is it was sometime between 262 AC and the time of Rhaegar and Elia's marriage, if Ashara were present going back as far as the wedding I have doubts that Selmy would've thought that she were new to court..

As I already said, Rhaegar and Elia lived on Dragonstone following their wedding.

7 minutes ago, Voice said:

I don't disagree. But N+?=J is a red herring for fantasy novices. Experienced fantasy readers will be looking for a hidden prince/king. I believe RLJ is a red herring for them.

N+X=J is a red herring, period. I can just as easily argue that the Lannisters killed Jon Arryn red herring is only for novice mystery readers.

This isn't about whether or not someone thinks RLJ is obvious, but about the way GRRM constructed the mysteries of Jon's parentage and Jon Arryn's killer. It's objective, and doesn't cater to anyone's desired outcome. Unlike pretending to read GRRM's mind.

7 minutes ago, Voice said:

He's Dornish-looking enough to pass for Wylla/Ashara's son. And:

Jon is said to have the Stark look, and being darker than someone who is fair skinned does not make one dark. Just as being taller than a short person does not make one tall.

[Pain killer Jane]

22 minutes ago, Voice said:

Agreed.

And all your fever scenarios are plausible. I do think it would be a bit too coincidental for Lyanna to be going into labour as Ned is fighting, but it's fantasy. Anything is possible.

I don't think it was a fever. Not that the fever is a good candidate especially if the mid wife whom I will assume is Wylla did not take measures to counteract an bad humors i.e. washing her hands and sterilizing the birthing area. But when I think of a bed of blood, I think it was probably Sever Postpartum hemorrhaging probably caused by Preeclampsia which present in a woman's first pregnancy and if the woman is carrying twins.

[Voice]

1 hour ago, Ygrain said:

Ah, BS. He looks like a typical Stark. Nowhere it is mentioned that he is dark for a Stark. He is darkER than Tully-Starks. Because people with auburn hair and blue eyes have fairer skin tone than those with brown hair and dark eyes. It's the same reading comprehension fail as when people claim that Ned was short because he was shortER than Brandon.

Quote

Jon is said to have the Stark look, and being darker than someone who is fair skinned does not make one dark. Just as being taller than a short person does not make one tall.

 

Sounds like you two have the same talking points. It may well be that Jon is as fair skinned as Robb, but the text seems to suggest otherwise. Arya has the coloring of the Starks, in hair and eye, but Jon's eyes seem to be even darker. And Arya's skintone is never suggested to be dark.

@Ygrain, again, no reason to get snippy. Crying BS and failed reading comprehension are not constructive means of debate.

 

 

49 minutes ago, J. Stargaryen said:

N+X=J is a red herring, period. I can just as easily argue that the Lannisters killed Jon Arryn red herring is only for novice mystery readers.

This isn't about whether or not someone thinks RLJ is obvious, but about the way GRRM constructed the mysteries of Jon's parentage and Jon Arryn's killer. It's objective, and doesn't cater to anyone's desired outcome. Unlike pretending to read GRRM's mind.

 

I make no claims as to mind-reading. No need to get chippy my friend.

We actually agree quite a bit on these points. I did not find RLJ to be obvious. It wasn't for me. But I typically only read nonfiction, and rarely read fantasy. For adept readers of the Fantasy genre, yes, RLJ screams from the page in bright neon lights.

Again, I quite like RLJ, and hope it ends up being the answer. But rarely has GRRM made such a solution as simple as RLJ, particularly before the actual revelation.

And let me just note that my purpose in participating in this thread was not to debate the merits of one theory or another. It was to point out that all theories are worthy of consideration until the series is complete. If you feel such consideration is a waste of time, you are free to refrain from it.

It's all supposed to be fun, right?

[The Ned's Little Girl]

1 hour ago, Voice said:

He's Dornish-looking enough to pass for Wylla/Ashara's son.

Sorry, but no. It's a big leap to surmise that Jon Snow looks Dornish when he's never described as looking that way. He's only described as looking like a Stark or looking like Arya (who looks like a Stark).

He looked more like a Stark than his siblings who actually were named Stark (as Catelyn noted bitterly).

The interest in Jon Snow (what little of it there is by other characters) is in relation to Ned, Ned's famous honor and what an uncommon woman she must have been to make Ned tumble off his high horse. Not as an explanation for "Dornish-looking", which doesn't enter into anybody's speculation at all.

 

[J. Stargaryen]

6 minutes ago, Voice said:

 

Sounds like you two have the same talking points. It may well be that Jon is as fair skinned as Robb, but the text seems to suggest otherwise. Arya has the coloring of the Starks, in hair and eye, but Jon's eyes seem to be even darker. And Arya's skintone is never suggested to be dark.

What you describe as talking points I would describe as common sense.

6 minutes ago, Voice said:

@Ygrain, again, no reason to get snippy. Crying BS and failed reading comprehension are not constructive means of debate.

We could quibble about tone, but she's not wrong about the latter. If you read a passage and come away with a faulty conclusion, that's poor reading comprehension.

6 minutes ago, Voice said:

I make no claims as to mind-reading. No need to get chippy my friend.

Sure, you didn't say that you could read GRRM's mind. You only said that you've read many of his other works, and that the obvious RLJ isn't his style. As opposed to looking at the objective construction of the respective mysteries we're comparing.

6 minutes ago, Voice said:

We actually agree quite a bit on these points. I did not find RLJ to be obvious. It wasn't for me. But I typically only read nonfiction, and rarely read fantasy. For adept readers of the Fantasy genre, yes, RLJ screams from the page in bright neon lights.

This is not universally the case, though. And even if it were, you're assuming that GRRM set out to fool those people.

6 minutes ago, Voice said:

But rarely has GRRM made such a solution as simple as RLJ, particularly before the actual revelation.

Such as? I mean, if you go back and reread the first three books there are several hints that LF & Lysa are behind Jon Arryn's death.

6 minutes ago, Voice said:

And let me just note that my purpose in participating in this thread was not to debate the merits of one theory or another. It was to point out that all theories are worthy of consideration until the series is complete. If you feel such consideration is a waste of time, you are free to refrain from it.

It's all supposed to be fun, right?

I don't think people are debating the merits of RLJ vs. AD+L=J. Instead, a couple of us are objecting to you saying that book-Jon looks Dornish, which is completely unsupported in the text.

[Voice]

40 minutes ago, The Ned's Little Girl said:

Sorry, but no. It's a big leap to surmise that Jon Snow looks Dornish when he's never described as looking that way. He's only described as looking like a Stark or looking like Arya (who looks like a Stark).

He looked more like a Stark than his siblings who actually were named Stark (as Catelyn noted bitterly).

The interest in Jon Snow (what little of it there is by other characters) is in relation to Ned, Ned's famous honor and what an uncommon woman she must have been to make Ned tumble off his high horse. Not as an explanation for "Dornish-looking", which doesn't enter into anybody's speculation at all.

 

 

Fair enough. Just tossing out wrinkles for the sake of discussion. Dark where Robb was fair seems rather extraneous if Bran was only referring to Tully-coloring, which he had already addressed. But I respect your position.

 

33 minutes ago, J. Stargaryen said:

What you describe as talking points I would describe as common sense.

We could quibble about tone, but she's not wrong about the latter. If you read a passage and come away with a faulty conclusion, that's poor reading comprehension.

 

I'm starting to forget why I even bother. LOL

Feel free to judge my interpretation as faulty. Feel free to take label that judgement an objective fact.

But it is not.

If this were an elementary course in reading comprehension, a strict instructor would deem any parentage that does not include Ned as poor reading comprehension, as the text states Ned is Jon's father repeatedly.

 

Quote

Sure, you didn't say that you could read GRRM's mind. You only said that you've read many of his other works, and that the obvious RLJ isn't his style. As opposed to looking at the objective construction of the respective mysteries we're comparing.

 

The only objective construction is that Ned is Jon's father. All else is subjective interpretation.

And yes, I do encourage folks to read GRRM's other works. Some of them are quite good. He does interesting things with our trained expectations as readers.

 

Quote

This is not universally the case, though. And even if it were, you're assuming that GRRM set out to fool those people.

 

It's pretty universal in my limited experience, but my experience is, as stated, limited to friends/family/students. It has been an interesting survey to conduct though, and I'm sure most people here have done it as well.

When surveying readers, a very clear line emerges between those who see RLJ on a first-read and those who do not. The first-read seers are experienced fantasy readers. The latter group is typically not. I've had a few experiences in which people from the latter group found RLJ on their own as well.

Granted, it was not a formal sociology experiment. But it has been interesting to watch. I think the popularity of the theory speaks to just how common my experience is.

 

Quote

Such as? I mean, if you go back and reread the first three books there are several hints that LF & Lysa are behind Jon Arryn's death.

 

That's precisely my point, actually. Upon reread, after the conclusion is known, such clues are rather obvious. But, to suggest that they were obvious before the conclusion was revealed is nonsense. They were present, but far from obvious.

Unlike Robert's Rebellion, Robert's hatred of Rhaegar, Lyanna's disappearance, and the number of men said to have raped/loved/abducted Lyanna.

Such information is far from subtle for even novice fantasy readers. For adept fantasy readers, they paint a very clear picture, as they do for us engaged in the current conversation.

Amid that very clear picture, there are slight hiccups. Anomalies.

 

Quote

I don't think people are debating the merits of RLJ vs. AD+L=J. Instead, a couple of us are objecting to you saying that book-Jon looks Dornish, which is completely unsupported in the text.

 

Ah. Well originally, the objection was that Ashara could not have given birth to Dany, because Ashara died 8-9 months prior when Jon was born.

While that was not supported by the text, or SSM, I can at least point to a passage that states that Jon's eyes are nearly black and that he is dark where his Robb was fair.

I can point to another passage, and state that his wetnurse was from Dorne, as well as his milkbrother.

And it should be noted that not all Dornish-looking people need be as swarthy as Arianne Martell.

Jon is dark, for example, where Edric Dayne is fair.  So, "completely unsupported" seems a bit heavy handed.

[J. Stargaryen]

Quote

That's precisely my point, actually. Upon reread, after the conclusion is known, such clues are rather obvious. But, to suggest that they were obvious before the conclusion was revealed is nonsense. They were present, but far from obvious.

This is exactly what many readers have said about RLJ, though.

Also, I would dispute your claim that clues implicating LF and Lysa were far from obvious. For example, LF tells Cat he lost the catspaw blade to Tyrion betting on Jaime to beat Ser Loras in a joust. But Renly remarks at the Hand's tourney that he would have won twice as much betting against Ser Jaime, if Tyrion had been present. Why is that? Because, as Tyrion later tells Cat, he always bets on his brother, never against him as LF claimed. Lysa leaving KL immediately after her husband died could be read as an indication of a guilty conscience.

Once you acknowledge the amount clues pointing toward RLJ, there are two possibilities: it's true, or it's a red herring. But in order for the latter to be the case, there is a need for it to be extremely obvious. Because red herrings only work if the audience knows they exist. Something that is not lost on me when someone who doesn't believe RLJ tries to tell me just how obvious it is, despite lots of people claiming otherwise.

Quote

Ah. Well originally, the objection was that Ashara could not have given birth to Dany, because Ashara died 8-9 months prior when Jon was born.

In that case, my apologies.

Quote

While that was not supported by the text, or SSM, I can at least point to a passage that states that Jon's eyes are nearly black and that he is dark where his Robb was fair.

Regarding Jon's eyes, there's a similarly worded passage about Valyrian steel. And yeah, he's darker than Robb.

       Most Valyrian steel was a grey so dark it looked almost black, as was true here as well. - ASoS

       Jon’s eyes were a grey so dark they seemed almost black, but there was little they did not see. - AGoT

Quote

I can point to another passage, and state that his wetnurse was from Dorne, as well as his milkbrother.

How would this show that he looks Dornish?

Quote

And it should be noted that not all Dornish-looking people need be as swarthy as Arianne Martell.

Jon is dark, for example, where Edric Dayne is fair.  So, "completely unsupported" seems a bit heavy handed.

I say it's completely unsupported because it's completely unsupported. At least as far as I can see. If it turns out I'm mistaken, -- say, Jon is objectively dark, and not just darker than Robb -- I apologize in advance, and promise to eat my words when the time comes.

---

Just to be clear, I like you and think you're polite and intelligent. It just so happens that I strongly disagree with you on a few things, which is no secret. I get the impression you might be taking my comments more personally than they were intended. If they came off that way, I apologize.

[Lady Blizzardborn]

7 hours ago, OuttaOldtown said:

 

I find it unlikely since Arianne seems to know her, the whole conversation with Arys seems to be suggesting that she was his Paramour for a long period of time and remained with the Martells after he died. Given that he is Doran's uncle I think its safe to bet he was in KG long before Ashara was even born...

And of course you may be absolutely right. 

[Voice]

1 hour ago, J. Stargaryen said:

This is exactly what many readers have said about RLJ, though.

Also, I would dispute your claim that clues implicating LF and Lysa were far from obvious. For example, LF tells Cat he lost the catspaw blade to Tyrion betting on Jaime to beat Ser Loras in a joust. But Renly remarks at the Hand's tourney that he would have won twice as much betting against Ser Jaime, if Tyrion had been present. Why is that? Because, as Tyrion later tells Cat, he always bets on his brother, never against him as LF claimed. Lysa leaving KL immediately after her husband died could be read as an indication of a guilty conscience.

Once you acknowledge the amount clues pointing toward RLJ, there are two possibilities: it's true, or it's a red herring. But in order for the latter to be the case, there is a need for it to be extremely obvious. Because red herrings only work if the audience knows they exist. Something that is not lost on me when someone who doesn't believe RLJ tries to tell me just how obvious it is, despite lots of people claiming otherwise.

 

Again, this is my point. The audience has been trained by the fantasy genre itself to look for a hidden heir/prince/king.

The moment all the smiles died is not subtle.

The abduction/rape of Lyanna is the backstory for the entire first book: i.e. the aftermath of Robert's Rebellion.

"Rhaegar loved his lady Lyanna" is, well, rather direct.

That Jon is not like his siblings, is also, extremely obvious.

I think we may have to agree to disagree on this one. It is a subjective debate regardless. You see a subtlety that I do not. "Let them grow up close as brothers" pretty much seals the deal. Add in the "promise me" refrain, and Jon asking himself, "He was his father's son. Wasn't he? Wasn't he?" (Jon VI, Clash) and GRRM is presenting the question verbatim, from the very protagonist in question.

 

I call that extremely obvious. Add in some familiarity with the fantasy genre, and he's basically said X marks the spot.

 

1 hour ago, J. Stargaryen said:

In that case, my apologies.

Regarding Jon's eyes, there's a similarly worded passage about Valyrian steel. And yeah, he's darker than Robb.

       Most Valyrian steel was a grey so dark it looked almost black, as was true here as well. - ASoS

       Jon’s eyes were a grey so dark they seemed almost black, but there was little they did not see. - AGoT

 

Another area of agreement.

Jon is darker than Robb, and is darker than Edric Dayne... whose Dornishness is beyond question.

 

1 hour ago, J. Stargaryen said:

How would this show that he looks Dornish?

 

Jon looks Starkish, this is true, and we again agree. But Jon's eyes are darker than the typical Stark eye color. There are Dornish people with dark eyes. We are told of no other Starks with eyes that border on black.

While I did not expect to write an essay on the topic, off the top of my head, this stands out to me as a way in which Jon might look Dornish. Unlike Robb, Jon is not fair. Jon is dark. Considering Jon's hair is brown, and his eye color has already been surveyed, it could be read that Bran is commenting upon Jon's complexion. He might not be of course, but this is another way in which Jon might be said to look Dornish, as many Dornishmen and women are dark where northerners are fair.

 

1 hour ago, J. Stargaryen said:

I say it's completely unsupported because it's completely unsupported. At least as far as I can see. If it turns out I'm mistaken, -- say, Jon is objectively dark, and not just darker than Robb -- I apologize in advance, and promise to eat my words when the time comes.

 

I agree that as far as you can see, there is no support for such a statement. I cannot say if you are limiting your perspective, or if your perspective is biased with subjectivity, or, if reading comprehension is at issue.

More likely, we are splitting semantic hairs.

 

1 hour ago, J. Stargaryen said:

---

Just to be clear, I like you and think you're polite and intelligent. It just so happens that I strongly disagree with you on a few things, which is no secret. I get the impression you might be taking my comments more personally than they were intended. If they came off that way, I apologize.

 

Not at all. I'm far thicker skinned than that, and I know the sound of actual malice. We're cool, J Star.

But as I japed above, questioning a fellow ASOIAF nerd's reading comprehension does sound a bit more like a personal attack than constructive discourse.

We can flippantly dismiss disagreement, or recognize that it is the very fuel of discourse. I do not disagree with any of your reasoning. I see it. Understand it. Share it.

I can make the case for RLJ, and have, and do, when someone deems it an impossibility. I no longer consider RLJ the most plausible scenario, but I still have a great fondness for the theory. I'd love for Jon to be the Son of Ice and Fire. It has a cool (hot?) ring to it. The anomalies are not without weight, and GRRM rarely makes climactic mysteries that obvious, but even still, I'd like it to be true. And it is fantasy, after all. If GRRM were not such a unique and multilayered storyteller, I'd never question RLJ.

 

[J. Stargaryen]

2 minutes ago, Voice said:

Again, this is my point. The audience has been trained by the fantasy genre itself to look for a hidden heir/prince/king.

The moment all the smiles died is not subtle.

The abduction/rape of Lyanna is the backstory for the entire first book: i.e. the aftermath of Robert's Rebellion.

"Rhaegar loved his lady Lyanna" is, well, rather direct.

That Jon is not like his siblings, is also, extremely obvious.

The method GRRM uses to hide RLJ -- Ned as Jon's father -- is what allows him to place the otherwise obvious RLJ clues throughout the text. Because for the majority of readers, it doesn't even occur to them that Ned isn't Jon's father. That's the trick.

8 minutes ago, Voice said:

I think we may have to agree to disagree on this one. It is a subjective debate regardless. You see a subtlety that I do not. "Let them grow up close as brothers" pretty much seals the deal. Add in the "promise me" refrain, and Jon asking himself, "He was his father's son. Wasn't he? Wasn't he?" (Jon VI, Clash) and GRRM is presenting the question verbatim, from the very protagonist in question.

I call that extremely obvious. Add in some familiarity with the fantasy genre, and he's basically said X marks the spot.

No, I don't. I've just seen lots of people say they didn't pick it up on their first read. As I said above, the trick with RLJ is not in the subtlety of the clues, but in the distraction GRRM uses.

Again, I'm going to note that in order for not-RLJ to be true, for all practical purposes it is a necessary condition that RLJ be very obvious, so that it can function as a red herring. And I think some of you have convinced yourselves that this is the case, because you need it to be.

11 minutes ago, Voice said:

Jon is darker than Robb, and is darker than Edric Dayne... whose Dornishness is beyond question.

Where is it stated that Jon is darker than Edric? I found this passage from ASoS, Arya VI:

He doesn’t like Ned. The squire seemed nice enough to Arya; maybe a little shy, but good-natured. She had always heard that Dornishmen were small and swarthy, with black hair and small black eyes, but Ned had big blue eyes, so dark that they looked almost purple. And his hair was a pale blond, more ash than honey.

It doesn't say anything about his complexion. In fact, of the four traits Arya mentions, she only contradicts two of them-- the hair and the eyes. This makes me think it's at least possible that he had a swarthy complexion. Is there another passage describing his appearance, specifically his complexion?

32 minutes ago, Voice said:

While I did not expect to write an essay on the topic, off the top of my head, this stands out to me as a way in which Jon might look Dornish. Unlike Robb, Jon is not fair. Jon is dark. Considering Jon's hair is brown, and his eye color has already been surveyed, it could be read that Bran is commenting upon Jon's complexion. He might not be of course, but this is another way in which Jon might be said to look Dornish, as many Dornishmen and women are dark where northerners are fair.

If that's the case, nobody ever mentions it in the series, despite at least a couple of people commenting on Jon's Stark appearance.

41 minutes ago, Voice said:

I agree that as far as you can see, there is no support for such a statement. I cannot say if you are limiting your perspective, or if your perspective is biased with subjectivity, or, if reading comprehension is at issue.

More likely, we are splitting semantic hairs.

Yeah, it must be one of those.

[purple-eyes]

6 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said:

The method GRRM uses to hide RLJ -- Ned as Jon's father -- is what allows him to place the otherwise obvious RLJ clues throughout the text. Because for the majority of readers, it doesn't even occur to them that Ned isn't Jon's father. That's the trick.

No, I don't. I've just seen lots of people say they didn't pick it up on their first read. As I said above, the trick with RLJ is not in the subtlety of the clues, but in the distraction GRRM uses.

Again, I'm going to note that in order for not-RLJ to be true, for all practical purposes it is a necessary condition that RLJ be very obvious, so that it can function as a red herring. And I think some of you have convinced yourselves that this is the case, because you need it to be.

Where is it stated that Jon is darker than Edric? I found this passage from ASoS, Arya VI:

He doesn’t like Ned. The squire seemed nice enough to Arya; maybe a little shy, but good-natured. She had always heard that Dornishmen were small and swarthy, with black hair and small black eyes, but Ned had big blue eyes, so dark that they looked almost purple. And his hair was a pale blond, more ash than honey.

It doesn't say anything about his complexion. In fact, of the four traits Arya mentions, she only contradicts two of them-- the hair and the eyes. This makes me think it's at least possible that he had a swarthy complexion. Is there another passage describing his appearance, specifically his complexion?

If that's the case, nobody ever mentions it in the series, despite at least a couple of people commenting on Jon's Stark appearance.

Yeah, it must be one of those.

actually that is possible that dayne is dark-skined. 

we know daeron the drunk had a yellowish skin and his mom is a dayne. 

ashara was said to be fair but that one is likely for her beauty, not her skin. 

although Stony dornish was indeed described as fair-skined. this is true. 

[OuttaOldtown]

6 minutes ago, purple-eyes said:

actually that is possible that dayne is dark-skined. 

we know daeron the drunk had a yellowish skin and his mom is a dayne. 

ashara was said to be fair but that one is likely for her beauty, not her skin. 

although Stony dornish was indeed described as fair-skined. this is true. 

I don't think Daeron the drunk got that from his mother, it's far more likely it came from his grandmother Mariah..

[purple-eyes]

9 minutes ago, OuttaOldtown said:

I don't think Daeron the drunk got that from his mother, it's far more likely it came from his grandmother Mariah..

well, we know Targ has this rule: 

a targ and a non-targ woman's first child must follow the look of mom. 

such as: rhaenys (daughter of rhaegar), jon snow, prince baelor, possibly tyrion, etc. 

[OuttaOldtown]

8 hours ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

And of course you may be absolutely right. 

It's Arianne's remark "she is an old woman now" that really kills it for me, Ashara wouldn't be that old at this point. The fact that it's possible is enough of a clue for some people, not for me, George's style is to use similar phrases and corresponding wording when he wants the reader to look deeper at something that isn't plainly written..

[OuttaOldtown]

4 minutes ago, purple-eyes said:

well, we know Targ has this rule: 

a targ and a non-targ woman's first child must follow the look of mom. 

such as: rhaenys (daughter of rhaegar), jon snow, prince baelor, possibly tyrion, etc. 

I'm not aware of this rule, nowhere is it stated that Dyanna had the dark features of a salty Dornish..