Jump to content

[Book Spoilers] R+L=J, A+J=T and other theories on HBO V.4


Suzanna Stormborn

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

All prophecy doesn't seem to be the seeing of the future fixed timeline, since Dany saw her son grown up in her vision, but this version of the future never happened.  

That was NOT a prophecy -- rather a "vision" of what might have been. Given that Rhaego was already dead when Dany had that vision, no one could think it was a prophecy.

And the other example sometimes given, the crones' prophecy that Rhaego would be TSTMTW, simply was a misinterpretation of what they saw -- they assumed the Stallion they saw was Rhaego -- actually it was Dany. Classic case of a prophecy being fulfilled but not in the way originally thought because the original seers misunderstood what they were seeing. While Dany typically would be a dragon in a prophecy -- in her capacity as leader of all the Khals, she properly is represented as a Stallion (or really Mare, but again, the crones assumed the horse was male).

The Three Heads of the Dragon prophecy is pointless to have been included in THOTU vision if the prophecy will not be fulfilled. Dany understands that she has to find the other two heads of the dragon based on hearing that prophecy. To end up concluding -- oops -- not a real prophecy, just a messed up statement by Rhaegar -- just makes no sense to me from a storytelling point of view -- or from a consistency point of view in terms of how GRRM is using prophecy in the story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering how whitewashed the Saint Tyrion character is vs his book counterpart, I'd tend to think that the Ds wouldn't shy away from an opportunity to also remove his status as a patricide if that is indeed what the George has in store for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^ While that might be the case, they still might conclude that as much as they might want to include that element, the plot complications would be too time consuming to justify. Of course, even assuming AJT to be true in the books, without knowing how GRRM plans to reveal the issue or make it relevant to the plot, determining how easy it would be to adapt to TV is impossible.

The final season only has 6 episodes. Only so many plot developments can be covered in that amount of time given that the fate of the world needs to be resolved in those episodes. Nevertheless, I still think AJT will be true in both the books and the show. I just have less confidence in the likelihood on the show than in the books.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However I will also say that even though D&D have laid little to no groundwork for AJT they could still do it.

For Instance; They never once showed a connection between Arya and Nymeria, but brought Nymeria back with no hints beforehand. I mean she knew where Arya was because of their warging powers, but show doesnt mention that at all.

Brought Rickon back from hiding with no hints beforehand that he would die or that Shaggy would die. 

Gave the Hound the power of fire-sight without any reasoning or previous hints

Brought Jon back to life with almost zero explanation or magic.

Made Dany fireproof but now seem to have forgotten they did that.

Made Jaime kill Olenna with zero build up or conflict between them personally.

Even Reek I feel like they did a poor job with, Theon seems perfectly fine most of the time now, book Reek looks like a frail Ghost with missing parts who can barely talk. Reek only pops out the one time when Theon jumped off the boat.

I had no idea Tommen would jump out of a window, there was zero character development to show that he was depressed or unstable at all.

Gilly said Sam 'always wanted to be a Maester'.....Did he? IIRC he did NOT want to at all, books or show, but for some reason they made her say that to him this week when he quit his job and walked out (also something that came totally out of left field). WHy did they make her say that?

Jon and Dany are being shipped on the show which started this season and there have been absolutely zero hints of it prior, no prophecies, no hints, nothing.  They do things for shock and awe and AJT they could whip out in one conversation to shock us without anything to back it up.

,

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sticking to my original opinion: while the show runners have made huge deviations, they still tick off the major plot points. If AJT is true then this should be important for whatever reason to the endgame, right? So a reveal in the show = true and a non-reveal = false as far as I'm concerned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Suzanna Stormborn said:

However I will also say that even though D&D have laid little to no groundwork for AJT they could still do it.

I agree with this. D&D did not lay much groundwork for RLJ either. But now that we are close to an explicit reveal, we get more details. I expect the same if AJT is true. If we all of a sudden start getting some exposition on Aerys and Joanna for example, that should be a giant red flag for AJT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Consigliere said:

I'm sticking to my original opinion: while the show runners have made huge deviations, they still tick off the major plot points. If AJT is true then this should be important for whatever reason to the endgame, right? So a reveal in the show = true and a non-reveal = false as far as I'm concerned.

I'm too lazy to go back to old threads, but I seem to remember this being the consensus years ago, quite possibly up until the leaks were revealed last year.

5 minutes ago, Consigliere said:

I agree with this. D&D did not lay much groundwork for RLJ either. But now that we are close to an explicit reveal, we get more details. I expect the same if AJT is true. If we all of a sudden start getting some exposition on Aerys and Joanna for example, that should be a giant red flag for AJT.

Yeah, I do still think this is possible next season.  And, the more I think about, the more I actually expect one of Jon or Dany to die before the endgame - especially now that they're basically an item one will probably sacrifice for the other - which would leave a dragon open.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Suzanna Stormborn I am not sure the WoW cover artwork is meant to be the Dragon Binder, it could also be the Horn of Joranum?

As for the dragons' fate, many of the books readers bet on Rhaegal "joining" Aegon VI's party in the DoD 2.0 and dying... Which is somewhat consistent with the show. And before that, many of us think that Viserion will be injured during the battle of Mereen and looked after by Tyrion (see the Cyvasse games threads). This could still happen during a dragon fight up North in the show.

And for what it's worth, in the show, the relationship between Sansa and Arya is very similar to the one between Dany and Tyrion IMHO, "wise" vs "wild", Ice vs Fire, older sibling vs younger one?. I suspect the "wise" will prevail in the end, when all the wars are over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/8/2017 at 5:45 PM, Lord Varys said:

I'm sort of inclined to believe that this may be true for certain core characters like Dany and Jon.

I expect Jon to die both in the books and the show, sacrificing himself for Daenerys and the world because that's going to be the point of his second life. Perhaps they will get a miracle child to continue the dynasty, perhaps not. But that's the outcome I see there. In the show Jon is most likely going to die while putting down the Dark Lord, in the books he may have a completely different arc involving his lonely mission on dragonback to the Heart of Winter where he is going to face the true origin of the Others in the books. If he ends up being imbued with fire magic like Mel is he may be the only character capable to withstand the insane cold up there. And a dragon and a burning sword should enable him to cleanse everything with fire that's *living* up there. I imagine the power behind the Others is a twisted greenseer who has preserved his or her life beneath a weirwood (grove) covered in ice. That would be the place where the Others were created..

Interesting speculation. Jon is on a kind of deep infiltration mission in the show, too, which may be inspired by the possible book quest you speculate on. I agree that Jon's post-resurrection properties may be crucial in that (there is also a vision of him fighting the Others with a redhot sword in his hands). Even if in the show, a final confrontation between NK and Jon is likely to be replacing this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Wouter said:

Interesting speculation. Jon is on a kind of deep infiltration mission in the show, too, which may be inspired by the possible book quest you speculate on. I agree that Jon's post-resurrection properties may be crucial in that (there is also a vision of him fighting the Others with a redhot sword in his hands). Even if in the show, a final confrontation between NK and Jon is likely to be replacing this.

Sure, thankfully there won't be a Night King in the books. If there was some head Other Dark Lord we would have heard about him by now, even if only in some sort of garbled story (like the one about the Last Hero). The Night's King of the books is a completely different character, showing up only after the end of the Long Night. He isn't the first Other nor was he ever the leader of the Others.

And, yes, the important question there is what on earth is the overall point of Jon's death and resurrection? Where does George want to go with this? Why is this necessary?

Now, I've said it many times already that I think that Beric Dondarrion could be resurrected via the kiss of fire because he had a drop of Targaryen blood. The only hint that this might be the case is the fact that the Targaryen family tree gives us Jena Dondarrion as the wife of Baelor Breakspear. Considering the usual Targaryen marriage policy it is very unlikely that she is not some Targaryen cousin through the female line, most likely a descendant of one of the six daughters of Rhaena Targaryen and Garmund Hightower. The idea would be that Targaryen/dragonlord blood somehow reacts with this kiss of fire spell, possibly because the dragonlords experimented with resurrection spells designed for the blood of the dragon back in Old Valyria - spells that found their way into the rituals of the red priests as time passed.

That could also help explain why Thoros only brought Beric dead - and not pretty much any member of the brotherhood who died. He must have tried after he succeeded with Beric the first time. Then the whole thing was not yet seen as a burden but rather as a great and divine miracle. Catelyn might have a drop of Targaryen blood, too, if we assume one of her Tully or Whent ancestors ever married a Lothston. The main line of House Lothston seems to be an unofficial cadet branch of House Targaryen, with Aegon IV fathering the elder children of Falena Stokeworth, not Lucas Lothston.

In that case, Beric would be a distant Targaryen descendant, too. And now that the cold winds rise and the new darkness approaches this guy is killed, resurrected by fire magic, and able to ignite common steel with the power of his blood. That is basically Azor Ahai light. And it is no coincidence at all. Beric is a precursor of the creature/hero/savior Jon is going to become.

But what could be the plot point of Jon's body being imbued with fire magic? Why should his blood have the ability to ignite (Valyrian) steel swords? Sure, the latter could come in handy when you are fighting a battle against the wights and Others, but unless you have an army of 'fire wights' with that ability and such swords you not going to win the battle or the war.

In fact, what the hell is the promised prince or Azor Ahai Reborn supposed to do to defeat the Others? Just lead some army or ride some dragon? Unlikely, since there are plenty of people who could do that. There must be some single special ability that comes with the whole thing, at least to the part of the savior trinity (I go with the idea that the dragon has three heads) who is going to be responsible for the fighting part. That's not Daenerys nor Tyrion.

Imbued with fire magic (like Melisandre), able to literally ignite his sword, capable of becoming a dragonrider, and eventually a pretty good skinchanger Jon Snow would be the perfect candidate to travel to the Heart of Winter. He could swiftly travel on dragonback, his innate heat would allow him to withstand the cold the worst winter since the Long Night will bring, as skinchanger he could scan the area and avoid Others and wights while making camp (not to mention that he could reach out to and converse with Bran), and finally - he and his dragon and his burning sword could destroy the home base/birthplace/power center of the Others - the Heart of Winter, whatever that (and whoever there) is.

But any of that should inevitably set him up for a suicide mission. Even if Dany/Drogon came after him, after they have defeated the army of the Others, it is not that likely that they are going to save him from there like Gandalf and the eagles saved Frodo and Sam. Perhaps she is going to find him there dying, or she only recovers his body. In any case, if Jon is going to be true hero, the one who is going to defeat the Others, he will give his life in the process of that. In this series this should be the price for that task.

And by the way - Brienne also got herself some Targaryen blood in TWoIaF. She also wields a Valyrian steel sword and is in the vicinity of Thoros, too. Just saying. Should we hope she is going to die and be resurrected soon? I'm pretty sure she is going to wield a burning Valyrian steel sword, too, playing no small role in the eventual fight against the Others after they breach the Wall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/15/2017 at 11:16 AM, Lord Varys said:

bird wights have yet to show up, and I think there is a reason why we don't see any raven or crow wights.

Isn't that what these are?

The moon was fat and full. Summer prowled through the silent woods, a long grey shadow that grew more gaunt with every hunt, for living game could not be found. The ward upon the cave mouth still held; the dead men could not enter. The snows had buried most of them again, but they were still there, hidden, frozen, waiting. Other dead things came to join them, things that had once been men and women, even children. Dead ravens sat on bare brown branches, wings crusted with ice. A snow bear crashed through the brush, huge and skeletal, half its head sloughed away to reveal the skull beneath. Summer and his pack fell upon it and tore it into pieces. Afterward they gorged, though the meat was rotted and half-frozen, and moved even as they ate it. (Bran III, ADWD)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Sure, thankfully there won't be a Night King in the books. If there was some head Other Dark Lord we would have heard about him by now, even if only in some sort of garbled story (like the one about the Last Hero). The Night's King of the books is a completely different character, showing up only after the end of the Long Night. He isn't the first Other nor was he ever the leader of the Others.

:agree:

 

7 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

And, yes, the important question there is what on earth is the overall point of Jon's death and resurrection? Where does George want to go with this? Why is this necessary?

Come on! Because Jon needs to leave the Night Watch to fulfil his destiny and GRRM's story: Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come. (...) And now his watch has ended.

Incidentally, yes, he died to become stronger, to kill the boy and let the man be born. Or as the Ironborn say, what is dead may never die and rises harder and stronger.

 

7 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Now, I've said it many times already that I think that Beric Dondarrion could be resurrected via the kiss of fire because he had a drop of Targaryen blood. The only hint that this might be the case is the fact that the Targaryen family tree gives us Jena Dondarrion as the wife of Baelor Breakspear. Considering the usual Targaryen marriage policy it is very unlikely that she is not some Targaryen cousin through the female line, most likely a descendant of one of the six daughters of Rhaena Targaryen and Garmund Hightower. The idea would be that Targaryen/dragonlord blood somehow reacts with this kiss of fire spell, possibly because the dragonlords experimented with resurrection spells designed for the blood of the dragon back in Old Valyria - spells that found their way into the rituals of the red priests as time passed.

Baelor Breakspear was probably one of the few Targs not caring about blood, but valour - so your Jena Dondarrion with a drop or two of Targ blood is a rather cheap point IMO.

 

7 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Snip - the rest about special Jon

What is special about Jon is not that he is a resurrected Targaryen, but a Targaryen and a Stark: Ice to withstand them, Fire to defeat them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Shmedricko said:

Isn't that what these are?

The moon was fat and full. Summer prowled through the silent woods, a long grey shadow that grew more gaunt with every hunt, for living game could not be found. The ward upon the cave mouth still held; the dead men could not enter. The snows had buried most of them again, but they were still there, hidden, frozen, waiting. Other dead things came to join them, things that had once been men and women, even children. Dead ravens sat on bare brown branches, wings crusted with ice. A snow bear crashed through the brush, huge and skeletal, half its head sloughed away to reveal the skull beneath. Summer and his pack fell upon it and tore it into pieces. Afterward they gorged, though the meat was rotted and half-frozen, and moved even as they ate it. (Bran III, ADWD)

Oh, I must have overlooked those. But I'd be really surprised if those creatures still could fly. Especially if the wings are crusted with ice.

5 hours ago, Jo Maltese said:

Come on! Because Jon needs to leave the Night Watch to fulfil his destiny and GRRM's story: Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come. (...) And now his watch has ended.

Incidentally, yes, he died to become stronger, to kill the boy and let the man be born. Or as the Ironborn say, what is dead may never die and rises harder and stronger.

Come on, the Watch could also be disbanded in the end when the Others are defeated. Or lose its point as soon as the Wall falls. Jon didn't have to die to get out of there. If that was the reason then it is a very stupid reason.

And it also doesn't help you with the way of the resurrection thing. Why go, most likely, with the kiss of fire thing there rather than some cleaner 'death pays for life' blood magic spell. Surely someone could work a similar spell as the one that brought Drogo back (assuming he died) or the one that hatched the dragon eggs. A spell that gives us back the guy as he was.

There is more to that than just getting the guy out of the NW. There has to be a specific purpose as to why he going to be imbued with fire magic. And, of course, as to why he has to be resurrected. He is not going to be a 'normal mortal man' after that.

5 hours ago, Jo Maltese said:

Baelor Breakspear was probably one of the few Targs not caring about blood, but valour - so your Jena Dondarrion with a drop or two of Targ blood is a rather cheap point IMO.

Baelor Breakspear was the Prince of Dragonstone and Heir Apparent to the Iron Throne. He could never have married a Dondarrion of all people without causing a massive scandal, contributing greatly to the Blackfyre Rebellion. But this had apparently no effect on any of that. We do know that Egg's later marriage a to a Blackwood - then the family of the King's Hand, Brynden Rivers, and a family of former Riverlands royalty - did cause a scandal and would have led to a major uproar had he not be the at the very end of the line of succession.

Baelor was the next king and the Dondarrions are definitely of lesser rank than the Blackwoods, having never worn crowns and descending from some messenger who was ennobled by the Storm Kings of old.

Besides, we do know that Aelinor Penrose, the wife of Baelor's younger brother Aerys I, was a Targaryen cousin. It wouldn't be surprising if two of those Targaryen-Hightower girls married into Houses Dondarrion and Penrose, respectively.

5 hours ago, Jo Maltese said:

What is special about Jon is not that he is a resurrected Targaryen, but a Targaryen and a Stark: Ice to withstand them, Fire to defeat them.

Well, last I checked the Starks had no special abilities to withstand the Others whatsoever. It would be interesting if this was the case but the Stark blood is clearly not 'magical' in the same way the Targaryen blood is. And even if it was, the only aspect there is that it may carry the skinchanger/greenseer potential. That is fine but it shouldn't help all that much with defeating the Others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Jo Maltese said:

@Suzanna Stormborn I am not sure the WoW cover artwork is meant to be the Dragon Binder, it could also be the Horn of Joranum?

As for the dragons' fate, many of the books readers bet on Rhaegal "joining" Aegon VI's party in the DoD 2.0 and dying... Which is somewhat consistent with the show. And before that, many of us think that Viserion will be injured during the battle of Mereen and looked after by Tyrion (see the Cyvasse games threads). This could still happen during a dragon fight up North in the show.

And for what it's worth, in the show, the relationship between Sansa and Arya is very similar to the one between Dany and Tyrion IMHO, "wise" vs "wild", Ice vs Fire, older sibling vs younger one?. I suspect the "wise" will prevail in the end, when all the wars are over.

https://winteriscoming.net/2016/01/04/yes-the-winds-of-winter-cover-with-the-horn-is-the-real-one-for-now/

 

Ive discussed this with several ppl and all agree its dragonbinder, it has carvings and markings as described in the books. And it's a horn that has already been introduced, Horn of Joramun is either a myth or just has not been introduced yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 16/8/2017 at 10:00 PM, Suzanna Stormborn said:

However I will also say that even though D&D have laid little to no groundwork for AJT they could still do it.

 

There is some groundwork. The most important one is easy to overlook because it is so obvious: Tywin treated Tyrion like he was not his son, as much as he did in the books.

The other major point is the intricate scene in which Tyrion frees Rhaegal and Viserion, without getting roasted for his troubles unlike Quentyn in the books. Tyrion gives a monologue in this scene, which establishes his obsession with dragons (something that the books established early on). Since Rhaegal and Viserion do next to nothing after being freed (at least in Meereen, and till now not in Westeros either) getting the dragons out doesn't seem the main point in this scene (Dany could have easily freed them after returning, using only Drogon to kill the slavers would be sufficient).

Some speculate that the main reason for this scene was to give screentime to Dinklage, but as groundwork for A+J=T this scene is quite something.

After that though, there are no further hints. Before, we had Drogon overflying Tyrion and Jorah in the ruins of Valyria, in a scene that was somewhat reminiscent of the bridge of dreams from the books.

A difference between books and show is that Tyrion and Sansa have a pretty courteous relationship, something which was emphasised in S7.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Wouter said:

There is some groundwork. The most important one is easy to overlook because it is so obvious: Tywin treated Tyrion like he was not his son, as much as he did in the books.

The other major point is the intricate scene in which Tyrion frees Rhaegal and Viserion, without getting roasted for his troubles unlike Quentyn in the books. Tyrion gives a monologue in this scene, which establishes his obsession with dragons (something that the books established early on). Since Rhaegal and Viserion do next to nothing after being freed (at least in Meereen, and till now not in Westeros either) getting the dragons out doesn't seem the main point in this scene (Dany could have easily freed them after returning, using only Drogon to kill the slavers would be sufficient).

Some speculate that the main reason for this scene was to give screentime to Dinklage, but as groundwork for A+J=T this scene is quite something.

After that though, there are no further hints. Before, we had Drogon overflying Tyrion and Jorah in the ruins of Valyria, in a scene that was somewhat reminiscent of the bridge of dreams from the books.

A difference between books and show is that Tyrion and Sansa have a pretty courteous relationship, something which was emphasised in S7.

 

The other clue (IMHO) was earlier this season in which Jon quotes the letter from Tyrion which states that all dwarfs are bastards in their father's eyes. The show could have chosen any line exchanged between Jon and Tyrion to demonstrate the genuineness of the letter (or just have Jon accept its genuineness without need of any type of line) -- but they chose to include that line. Seems like possible foreshadowing to me.

ETA: Oh, and in one of the prior seasons, Tywin made a statement about not being able to prove Tyrion was not Tywin's son. There probably is more foreshadowing that I am forgetting -- but in any case, there certainly has been some elements that could be viewed as foreshadowing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can be somewhat sure that the dragonbonding thing is not going to be important in the show. And in such a setting Tyrion doesn't really have to be Aerys' son for the plot to work. The dragon also doesn't exactly have three heads in the show.

In the books things are much different. If the show plays the Targaryen thing only or mostly for the claim thing then Tyrion would confuse things, instead of making the story work.

And we do know

Spoiler

that they will be down to two dragons by the weekend.

That means we could have Jon as another dragonrider if there is some kind of bonding ritual going to happen but they could just as well refuse to assign fixed riders to each dragon and thus completely change the plot there. It might even be that any Targaryen can ride any (Targaryen) dragon at any time. Not sure how the Dance would have worked if this was the case but, hell, who cares about that?

If they wanted to have Tyrion as Aerys' son they easily could lead up to that in the next season. Wouldn't need much exposition the way they do things. They are very good at pulling stuff out of their asses and establishing certain things 'they want to make sense'. For all we know Cersei or Jaime might know who Tyrion's true father is in the show. Or, even better, perhaps 'High Septon Maynard' has written about that in his diary, too?

I'd be skeptical about foreshadowing in the show. When they are actually using book dialogue they might have used stuff that is foreshadowing in the books but not really in the show because they are not going to do with that what the books are doing. Some lines are pretty powerful in their own right, and you can easily enough miss or ignore the potential/existing subtext.

They might have just intended to establish that Tywin hated Tyrion, not so much that Tywin isn't actually Tyrion's father.

But, well, I really like that development, and am really convinced that this is going to come in the books. I'd also be interested to see it in the show but I don't really think it means anything if they ignore it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the moment, I tend to doubt that the show is going to do A+J=T (even though I think it's almost certainly true for the books), but nevertheless, I did notice a line with potential double meaning in last week's episode, when Tyrion reunited with Jaime:

Quote

TYRION: He was going to execute me. He knew I was innocent. He didn't hate me because of anything I did. He hated me because of what I am, a little monster sent to punish him. Did he think I wanted to be born this way? Did he think I chose-- (S7E5)

And he did say this while surrounded by the dragon skulls beneath the Red Keep. But as noted above, they could just be hammering home the angle that Tywin hated Tyrion because he was a dwarf, without any intention of hinting at the idea that Tywin actually hated Tyrion because he knew/suspected that Tyrion was Aerys' bastard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

If they wanted to have Tyrion as Aerys' son they easily could lead up to that in the next season. Wouldn't need much exposition the way they do things. They are very good at pulling stuff out of their asses and establishing certain things 'they want to make sense'. For all we know Cersei or Jaime might know who Tyrion's true father is in the show. Or, even better, perhaps 'High Septon Maynard' has written about that in his diary, too?

I'd be skeptical about foreshadowing in the show. When they are actually using book dialogue they might have used stuff that is foreshadowing in the books but not really in the show because they are not going to do with that what the books are doing. Some lines are pretty powerful in their own right, and you can easily enough miss or ignore the potential/existing subtext.

They might have just intended to establish that Tywin hated Tyrion, not so much that Tywin isn't actually Tyrion's father.

But, well, I really like that development, and am really convinced that this is going to come in the books. I'd also be interested to see it in the show but I don't really think it means anything if they ignore it.

 

5 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

 

In the books things are much different. If the show plays the Targaryen thing only or mostly for the claim thing then Tyrion would confuse things, instead of making the story work.

I can't see the point in the show going with the A+J=T theory at this point. The revelation that he has been a secret Targaryen would be massively underwhelming compared to when Jon was revealed to have been one to the viewers and when he is eventually revealed to be one to the main characters in the show. With Jon, the implications involve the possibility of him having a claim. With Tyrion, he would most definitely be a bastard. At best, it may be that he could ride a dragon, but I still don't take the 'dragon must have three heads' too literally, plus I am unsure how heavily the show have play on this, if at all.

Tyrion being revealed as a Targaryen wouldn't even be 'nice' for him. He would realise the true reason his father hated him, but is the true reason of Tywin hating Tyrion because he is Aerys' child instead of his any better than him hating him because he is a dwarf? And also, despite never knowing his mother, she and Tywin were happily married; he came from a pair of parents in love with one another, so despite it all, he was born out of love. He most likely would be born out of rape if he was Aerys' son.

Yes, it would give him a closer connection to Daenerys, but being her brother doesn't automatically make him better for her. Think Viserys. Although, at the same time, that could be the spin they use on it: Daenerys finally having a brother she can experience something good with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...