Hair parentage

[velo-knight]

On 6/5/2017 at 7:00 AM, Prof. Cecily said:

This is all show material. We're talking about material from the books here.

 

I don't watch the show. I heard someone complain that the ToJ dream scene wasn't even in the show, so I don't know what you're talking about. 

[IceFire125]

14 hours ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

And, when Yandel proved himself ill-informed and/or biased when it comes to all things Robert's Rebellion, I'll treat his account with skepticism unless corroborated by some other source.

No worries, when Archmaester Sam writes his version of events... I think it will align quite well with Jon's "legitimacy", his royal blood and royal duty to the realm... as king. 

 

[Prof. Cecily]

17 hours ago, velo-knight said:

I don't watch the show. I heard someone complain that the ToJ dream scene wasn't even in the show, so I don't know what you're talking about. 

You don't watch the show? I envy your admirable self-control.

My remarks were directed to @Damein Blackfyre true king.

 

Still, you wrote this:

 

On 6/5/2017 at 5:20 AM, velo-knight said:

I'm assuming the KL comment was a mistake, actually - @Damein Blackfyre true king, did you mean to write "KG"?

Or three intelligent, dedicated men admired and chose the king who should have been, not the king who was. As an aside, how do we know that they even knew of the Viserys decree? Ned refers to Prince, not King, Viserys - and since the decree was issued in the short window between Rhaegar's death and the Sack, so even if word was sent, by the time the news arrived to the ToJ, it may have been arriving alongside the news that Aerys was dead, Viserys and Rhaella fled, and King's Landing taken. At that point, they may have considered Viserys to have abdicated or his claim to be invalid on the grounds of Aerys' well-known madness.

What's important is that Ned refers to Viserys as prince, and they do not correct him; that he implicitly challenges them to explain their presence (and potentially even offers them a way out, to exile with Viserys); they choose to remain where they are. Guarding their King.

You mean to say, the figures in a fever dream don't correct the dreamer on a point of protocol during a dream?

And?

Here's the dream:

Quote

In the dream his friends rode with him, as they had in life. Proud Martyn Cassel, Jory's father; faithful Theo Wull; Ethan Glover, who had been Brandon's squire; Ser Mark Ryswell, soft of speech and gentle of heart; the crannogman, Howland Reed; Lord Dustin on his great red stallion. Ned had known their faces as well as he knew his own once, but the years leech at a man's memories, even those he has vowed never to forget. In the dream they were only shadows, grey wraiths on horses made of mist.

They were seven, facing three. In the dream as it had been in life. Yet these were no ordinary three. They waited before the round tower, the red mountains of Dorne at their backs, their white cloaks blowing in the wind. And these were no shadows; their faces burned clear, even now. Ser Arthur Dayne, the Sword of the Morning, had a sad smile on his lips. The hilt of the greatsword Dawn poked up over his right shoulder. Ser Oswell Whent was on one knee, sharpening his blade with a whetstone. Across his white-enameled helm, the black bat of his House spread its wings. Between them stood fierce old Ser Gerold Hightower, the White Bull, Lord Commander of the Kingsguard.

"I looked for you on the Trident," Ned said to them.

“I looked for you on the Trident,” Ned said to them.

“We were not there,” Ser Gerold answered.

“Woe to the Usurper if we had been,” said Ser Oswell.

“When King's Landing fell, Ser Jaime slew your king with a golden sword, and I wondered where you were.”

“Far away,” Ser Gerold said, “or Aerys would yet sit the Iron Throne, and our false brother would burn in seven hells.”

“I came down on Storm's End to lift the siege,” Ned told them, and the Lords Tyrell and Redwyne dipped their banners, and all their knights bent the knee to pledge us fealty. I was certain you would be among them.”

“Our knees do not bend easily,” said Ser Arthur Dayne.

“Ser Willem Darry is fled to Dragonstone, with your queen and Prince Viserys. I thought you might have sailed with him.”

“Ser Willem is a good man and true,” said Ser Oswell.

“But not of the Kingsguard,” Ser Gerold pointed out. “The Kingsguard does not flee.”

“Then or now,” said Ser Arthur. He donned his helm.

“We swore a vow,” explained old Ser Gerold.

Ned’s wraiths moved up beside him, with shadow swords in hand. They were seven against three.

“And now it begins,” said Ser Arthur Dayne, the Sword of the Morning. He unsheathed Dawn and held it with both hands. The blade was pale as milkglass, alive with light.

“No,” Ned said with sadness in his voice. “Now it ends.”  As they came together in a rush of steel and shadow, he could hear Lyanna screaming. "Eddard!" she called. A storm of rose petals blew across a blood-streaked sky, as blue as the eyes of death.

A Game of Thrones - Eddard X

To be honest, I've been reading length past threads dedicated to readers wrangling through the true meaning of what happened at ToJ and I'm still wading through discussions from two years ago.

At the end of the day, what I get is that all that happened at ToJ will form a part of the next book AWOW.

So all the pieces of the puzzle will fit into place when we know the entire story.

 

[Prof. Cecily]

5 hours ago, IceFire125 said:

No worries, when Archmaester Sam writes his version of events... I think it will align quite well with Jon's "legitimacy", his royal blood and royal duty to the realm... as king. 

 

Good point!

 

 

[velo-knight]

20 hours ago, Prof. Cecily said:

You don't watch the show? I envy your admirable self-control.

My remarks were directed to @Damein Blackfyre true king.

 

Still, you wrote this:

 

You mean to say, the figures in a fever dream don't correct the dreamer on a point of protocol during a dream?

And?

Here's the dream:

To be honest, I've been reading length past threads dedicated to readers wrangling through the true meaning of what happened at ToJ and I'm still wading through discussions from two years ago.

At the end of the day, what I get is that all that happened at ToJ will form a part of the next book AWOW.

So all the pieces of the puzzle will fit into place when we know the entire story.

 

That's precisely my point: "Your Prince Viserys" is never responded with, "Our King Viserys". They just say that they're the Kingsguard; acknowledging that Ser Willem Darry is not - and that if Viserys was the King, he lacks KG protection - and instead of asking Ned to let them pass (as he seems to be offering) they prepare to fight. The RLJ threads have produced a lot of good analysis of what this scene means - but I agree with the argument that Martin goes to great lengths to avoid telling us outright who the Kingsguard are fighting for. The only obvious reason to do that would be if the Kingsguard are fighting for the King who is actually present - Jon Snow - and planned to somehow "restore" him to his "rightful throne".

[Prof. Cecily]

2 hours ago, velo-knight said:

That's precisely my point: "Your Prince Viserys" is never responded with, "Our King Viserys". They just say that they're the Kingsguard; acknowledging that Ser Willem Darry is not - and that if Viserys was the King, he lacks KG protection - and instead of asking Ned to let them pass (as he seems to be offering) they prepare to fight. The RLJ threads have produced a lot of good analysis of what this scene means - but I agree with the argument that Martin goes to great lengths to avoid telling us outright who the Kingsguard are fighting for. The only obvious reason to do that would be if the Kingsguard are fighting for the King who is actually present - Jon Snow - and planned to somehow "restore" him to his "rightful throne".

And I repeat.

Are you seriously claiming something that occurs in a fever dream is evidence of an historical fact from the past?

 

There are many ways to interpret the ToJ.

Until we learn the entire story, we can spin the dreams to our own taste, that is clear.

I wonder if it will be Jaime who eventually clears things up in conjunction with doccos from the Citadel.

 

Anyway, I've read the idea that Ned is racked with guilt because, by hiding the true-born king of Westeros in Winterfell, he has condemned the realm to the 'misrule' of Robert.

Something to mull over today.

 

[Ygrain]

2 hours ago, velo-knight said:

That's precisely my point: "Your Prince Viserys" is never responded with, "Our King Viserys". They just say that they're the Kingsguard; acknowledging that Ser Willem Darry is not - and that if Viserys was the King, he lacks KG protection - and instead of asking Ned to let them pass (as he seems to be offering) they prepare to fight.

Exactly. Because - and this should be kept in mind all the time - we are not dealing with a description of a real dream where things needn't make sense but with an invented one, where the use of every word is deliberate.

[Ygrain]

4 minutes ago, Prof. Cecily said:

Are you seriously claiming something that occurs in a fever dream is evidence of an historical fact from the past

We posted simultaneously, so once again: don't be distracted by the "fever dream" label, GRRM was not feverish when he wrote it. It is a very purposefully written passage, even if the dialogue (or even the events themselves) are not what really happened. We get the gist of the KG's attitude, and the fact that they are not worried about the supposed King Viserys not having a KG with him, and not even naming him King, is important.

[Prof. Cecily]

Just now, Ygrain said:

We posted simultaneously, so once again: don't be distracted by the "fever dream" label, GRRM was not feverish when he wrote it. It is a very purposefully written passage, even if the dialogue (or even the events themselves) are not what really happened. We get the gist of the KG's attitude, and the fact that they are not worried about the supposed King Viserys not having a KG with him, and not even naming him King, is important.

Very true, about the literary devise. 

In fact, as soon as I'd posted I realised that GRRM is not writing a chronicle, but rather a novel.

And dreams mean whatever he wants them to mean. And yes, the gist is that the KG believe one thing. 

Whether it's true or not is another story!