Jump to content

R+L=J v.165


Ygrain

Recommended Posts

51 minutes ago, IronBars said:

People believe R+L=J so much they can't see anything else

Or perhaps you are assigning the rights of an individual a higher value than other people do as compared to the risk to the individual's life or wellbeing of others.

Besides, you may think that NW was too risky for Jon but for Ned, his own brother was safe there for over a decade, so while it was a tough life, at the time when the decision was made, it was not "mortal danger".

51 minutes ago, IronBars said:

The most likely one of them to be true is R+L=J isnt true.

If RLJ is not true, then what is? You keep arguing against it using this single argument even though multiple people offered you scenarios why Jon couldn't, or shouldn't, be told, and the very same argument applies to every single parentage scenario because Jon the son of a fisherman's daughter has the same right to know as Jon the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna. Perhaps the FMD has a broad happy family who would welcome Jon with open arms? Perhaps she used the coin from Ned to establish a small business, wouldn't Jon be happier sailing the seas than at the Wall? Sorry but holding this particular argument against RLJ while other theories get a free pass is double standards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody gets a free pass.  When you claim that something is certain with a 99% probability, then you can't complain if somebody points out the shortcomings or doesn't agree with your assumptions.  It's your theory that's being tested not someone else's theory.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, IronBars said:

The fact later in the book ned has no qualms telling robert the children he thinks are his are infact jamie lannisters (which would have the near the exact same result ie a civil war ) makes the arguement he didnt tell jon for the fear of starting a civil war a false idea because he was willing to do just that so robert new the truth.

The argument he didnt tell jon for jons own safety is valid only up until jon is joinng the NW - because jons life is in mortal danger at the wall and ned let him take the black with not so much as an attempt to stop him. So at this poimt the argument he didnt tell jon for jons safety also becomes a false idea. Because 1. Hes going to be in danger anyway and 2. Once takes the black he renounces all claims (he may have).

In my opinion the only valid reason to not tell jon at that point is 1. R+L = J isn't true, or 2. ned is so ashamed of lying to jon and fears him hating him for lying all his life.

The most likely one of them to be true is R+L=J isnt true.

People believe R+L=J so much they can't see anything else.

 


This is a completely baseless and illogical assessment. Ned being willing to go to war against the Lannisters, whom he pretty much hates and blames for ruining the Robert he knew, is not the same as Ned being willing go to war with Robert, whom he loves as a brother.

Ned looks at the Lannisters as a cancer that has destroyed his beloved friend Robert, and who came in at the last moment of their rebellion and tainted the whole thing by murdering the Targaryen king and babies. They did nothing all war until it was clear the rebels would win. Then they entered the rebel side by murdering the Targaryen children, something which almost ended Robert's and Ned's friendship for good. For that the Lannisters received a royal marriage. A marriage which made Robert miserable, while they increased their power and schemed to put their incest born bastards with no relation to Robert on his throne. He presumes they murdered Jon Arryn for learning this secret. He presumes they tried to murder his son Bran for learning something of this secret.

Revealing Jon's identity means putting the life of his beloved sister's son at risk in any number of ways, both at the hands of his beloved friend and those he hates, risking the possibility of a conflict with his beloved friend Robert whom he had just helped destroy a dynasty with to put him on a throne, and risking the possibility of putting the lives of his own wife and children at risk. He had every reason not to tell anyone, including Jon. Jon himself could one day grow to feel he is entitled to the throne. Even if he never did, there would always be those who would want him dead or feel they could win favor by assassinating him. Targaryen loyalists and/or enemies of Robert could attempt to use him and his claim, as was intended to use Aemon against Aegon before he added Night's Watch vows to his Maester vows to prevent that. 

There is a huge difference between the dangers of joining the Night's Watch, which until lately only had to deal with wildlings, and the dangers of revealing a male line Targaryen claimant that happens to be his nephew. This is a society in which his trueborn sons were trained for the possibility of going to war against other trained warriors. Sending his well trained nephew to the Wall to fight wildlings that have crap for weapons is not some major risk compared to what he would have done had he remained at Winterfell under his bastard guise. Outing his true identity would have been far more dangerous than the bastard guise, whether he went to the Wall or remained at Winterfell.

Fifteen years after the war, we see how seriously Robert takes what would have been a female line claimant supported by Dothraki who have never crossed a sea. Ned would have every reason to think Robert would take seriously an actual male line Targaryen claimant with the potential to rally actual Westerosi houses, especially since this male line Targaryen claimant would be the son of Rhaegar, whom Robert hates passionately, with Lyanna.

And Jon taking the black after having his identity revealed would not have kept him safe, just made him a sitting duck. We see that Tywin and Cersei have no problem sending people to the Wall to do their bidding, including to attempt to assassinate a bastard Jon. In fact, it is highly likely that Cersei's plot to murder Jon and Jon's stabbing have a good deal of overlap if they are not one and the same.

You haven't presented a single shred of support for the idea that RLJ isn't true, on the contrary, you have just demonstrated that you are the one that is guilty of what you accuse others here of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, IronBars said:

People believe R+L=J so much they can't see anything else.

This reminds me of a lecture I once attended on dog behavior with Dr. Ian Dunbar.  He was a veterinarian who studied a colony of beagles at University of California for ten years. At the time, there was a buzz in the dog sport community about the 'second fear period' that all dogs were subject to in their development.  Something to be avoided because a dog could develop a generalized fear of the environment.  It was canon, on everyone's lips and cited in documents, articles and books at the time.

Dr. Dunbar took the time to find the original study and discovered that dogs (lab animals) were being placed in an enclosed run and then subjected to a mild shock through their feet.  The result was that the dogs developed a generalized fear of the environment.  Is anyone surprised?  Needless to say the second fear period isn't cited by anyone anymore.  But it was a 99% probability at one time.

  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Over a hundred pages of presentation of evidence from the books and discussion, but please, tell us more of these anecdotal stories that are completely irrelevant to this meticulously written fictional story in which the parentage of Jon Snow is one of the central mysteries of the first book and series as a whole. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, LynnS said:

When you claim that something is certain with a 99% probability, then you can't complain if somebody points out the shortcomings or doesn't agree with your assumptions.

That's true, but not everyone has made such crazy claims, and those who have may not really understand what they are saying. 

For instance, suppose we say "The probability of R+L=J is 99%."  

It follows immediately that the probability of all other theories combined -- what we might call Not (R+L=J) -- is only 1%.  

Thus, R+L=J has been stated as 99x more probable than all other theories of Jon's parents combined.  

This is quite a remarkable position to adopt, given that it can't be demonstrated conclusively that Rhaegar and Lyanna ever had so much as a two-minute conversation.   We can imagine such conversations, we can imagine they spent lots of time together, we can imagine they had a little baby, but that's all we can do; the canon does not provide enough info for proof.

So my guess is that even in this thread, most participants would not stake out such mathematically indefensible turf, but would instead just say, much more reasonably: "I believe R+L=J."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/25/2018 at 1:39 PM, Ygrain said:

Or perhaps you are assigning the rights of an individual a higher value than other people do as compared to the risk to the individual's life or wellbeing of others.

Besides, you may think that NW was too risky for Jon but for Ned, his own brother was safe there for over a decade, so while it was a tough life, at the time when the decision was made, it was not "mortal danger".

If RLJ is not true, then what is? You keep arguing against it using this single argument even though multiple people offered you scenarios why Jon couldn't, or shouldn't, be told, and the very same argument applies to every single parentage scenario because Jon the son of a fisherman's daughter has the same right to know as Jon the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna. Perhaps the FMD has a broad happy family who would welcome Jon with open arms? Perhaps she used the coin from Ned to establish a small business, wouldn't Jon be happier sailing the seas than at the Wall? Sorry but holding this particular argument against RLJ while other theories get a free pass is double standards.

Ok, as i said in a different thread, jon thought the NW was full of honourable men where he could serve and find a place for himself and honour, but the NW was full of the worst people in westeros society, so the truth of that would of hit jon hard, ned didnt care enough to tell him that beforehand tho did he ? Over the years it became less about not telling jon for jon and more not telling ned for ned himself.

If jon was a fisherwomans son, he should of known who his mother was long before the nw, and indeed before he joined, however joining the NW he can never leave doesnt have the same impact as if R+L=J, 

The other theories on jons heritage arent even allowed a thread since R+L=J is so widely accepted, so thats why focus on that. 

On 1/25/2018 at 3:02 PM, Bael's Bastard said:


This is a completely baseless and illogical assessment. Ned being willing to go to war against the Lannisters, whom he pretty much hates and blames for ruining the Robert he knew, is not the same as Ned being willing go to war with Robert, whom he loves as a brother.
 

Ok read what that was in reply to, was said in reply to someone who stated ned wanted to avoid a civil war, so i showed how was willinh to risk civil war later in the story. 

On 1/25/2018 at 3:02 PM, Bael's Bastard said:




Ned looks at the Lannisters as a cancer that has destroyed his beloved friend Robert, and who came in at the last moment of their rebellion and tainted the whole thing by murdering the Targaryen king and babies. They did nothing all war until it was clear the rebels would win. Then they entered the rebel side by murdering the Targaryen children, something which almost ended Robert's and Ned's friendship for good. For that the Lannisters received a royal marriage. A marriage which made Robert miserable, while they increased their power and schemed to put their incest born bastards with no relation to Robert on his throne. He presumes they murdered Jon Arryn for learning this secret. He presumes they tried to murder his son Bran for learning something of this secret.

Revealing Jon's identity means putting the life of his beloved sister's son at risk in any number of ways, both at the hands of his beloved friend and those he hates, risking the possibility of a conflict with his beloved friend Robert whom he had just helped destroy a dynasty with to put him on a throne, and risking the possibility of putting the lives of his own wife and children at risk. He had every reason not to tell anyone, including Jon. Jon himself could one day grow to feel he is entitled to the throne. Even if he never did, there would always be those who would want him dead or feel they could win favor by assassinating him. Targaryen loyalists and/or enemies of Robert could attempt to use him and his claim, as was intended to use Aemon against Aegon before he added Night's Watch vows to his Maester vows to prevent that. 

There is a huge difference between the dangers of joining the Night's Watch, which until lately only had to deal with wildlings, and the dangers of revealing a male line Targaryen claimant that happens to be his nephew. This is a society in which his trueborn sons were trained for the possibility of going to war against other trained warriors. Sending his well trained nephew to the Wall to fight wildlings that have crap for weapons is not some major risk compared to what he would have done had he remained at Winterfell under his bastard guise. Outing his true identity would have been far more dangerous than the bastard guise, whether he went to the Wall or remained at Winterfell.
 

All well an good, but as i said in another thread, when jon learns ned has been killed and rob has called his banners, jon has a choice to make, emotions running high etc, he chooses to stay at the wall. 

Thus proving he could handle the truth about his identity.

Now i imagine ned new jon better then we did, so he should of seen that.

Mortal danger is mortal danger no matter where it comes from

On 1/25/2018 at 3:02 PM, Bael's Bastard said:

.

Fifteen years after the war, we see how seriously Robert takes what would have been a female line claimant supported by Dothraki who have never crossed a sea. Ned would have every reason to think Robert would take seriously an actual male line Targaryen claimant with the potential to rally actual Westerosi houses, especially since this male line Targaryen claimant would be the son of Rhaegar, whom Robert hates passionately, with Lyanna.

And Jon taking the black after having his identity revealed would not have kept him safe, just made him a sitting duck. We see that Tywin and Cersei have no problem sending people to the Wall to do their bidding, including to attempt to assassinate a bastard Jon. In fact, it is highly likely that Cersei's plot to murder Jon and Jon's stabbing have a good deal of overlap if they are not one and the same.
 

2 things here :.

1st you talk like telling jon is announcing it to everyone - its not.

2nd i didnt say he would be say at the wall if hes identity was revealed ygrain did.

On 1/25/2018 at 3:02 PM, Bael's Bastard said:

.You haven't presented a single shred of support for the idea that RLJ isn't true, on the contrary, you have just demonstrated that you are the one that is guilty of what you accuse others here of.

I dont need to prove R+L=J, i just pointed out why it doesnt make sense given the crux moment in jons life when he joins the NW that his identity isnt revealed to him, i have stated why and everyones counter arguement is civil wars and ned fearing for his life.

Yet as i keep saying telling jon and telling all westeros is not the same thing even pointed out something that makes it seem like jon could of handled it.

And another thing the burden is on you and others who believe it to prove R+L=J (which you cant) not me to disprove it.

Also i was told other theories on jons parentage arent allowed there own thread and must be discussed in the R+L=J thread, (by a mod) which is very odd, R+L=J is just a theory with no actual evidence after all, which is why i say ye all assume R+L=J to the point cant see anything else, its like want any arguments against the theory to be lost in the 200 pages plus (no one will read all of)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, IronBars said:

The other theories on jons heritage arent even allowed a thread since R+L=J is so widely accepted, so thats why focus on that. 

What are you talking about? The forum archives are full of various theories thread. The point is, you should go to the pinned thread for discussing aspects of RLJ, whether for or against.

Quote

All well an good, but as i said in another thread, when jon learns ned has been killed and rob has called his banners, jon has a choice to make, emotions running high etc, he chooses to stay at the wall. 

Thus proving he could handle the truth about his identity.

You're

1) putting a cart before the horses - this works only in hindsight, there is no telling beforehands, and

2) mixing apples and pears - while Jon's decision to stay in the watch does have something to do with his identity, it's about embracing who he is, not finding out that he is not who he thought he was. Two completely different things.

Quote

i just pointed out why it doesnt make sense given the crux moment in jons life when he joins the NW that his identity isnt revealed to him

What doesn't make sense about Ned fearing the consequences? As the saying goes, a word cannot be unspoken, it is not a game where you can load an older save when things go south.

Quote

And another thing the burden is on you and others who believe it to prove R+L=J (which you cant) not me to disprove it.

How very convenient, to let others do the work when you don't even want to hear, or do you?

Quote

 R+L=J is just a theory with no actual evidence after all,

There is a summation of the evidence in the OP of each pinned thread. You may want to read it.

Quote

which is why i say ye all assume R+L=J to the point cant see anything else

Believe me, in my time at the forums, seen it all. 

Besides, it's not like you are offering anything else, are you?

Quote

its like want any arguments against the theory to be lost in the 200 pages plus (no one will read all of)

The OP is not that long :D

Besides, that's what the discussion is for - you want information, you get it.

 

ETA: Anyway, this is going in circles. If you are not satisfied with explanations why it might make sense for Ned not to tell Jon, there's nothing to be done. Unless you have other  questions pertaining to the other RLJ stuff, I'm out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ygrain said:

What are you talking about? The forum archives are full of various theories thread. The point is, you should go to the pinned thread for discussing aspects of RLJ, whether for or against.

Have it in my messages from.a mod

4 hours ago, Ygrain said:

You're

1) putting a cart before the horses - this works only in hindsight, there is no telling beforehands, and

2) mixing apples and pears - while Jon's decision to stay in the watch does have something to do with his identity, it's about embracing who he is, not finding out that he is not who he thought he was. Two completely different things.

1 - Ned should of known and probably did no enough of jons character to of known how he react in advance, thats part of parenthood, jons character didnt change in the short time he up until the point i mentioned

2 - EXACTLY - he embraces who he is, like he would of done had he been told the truth

4 hours ago, Ygrain said:

What doesn't make sense about Ned fearing the consequences? As the saying goes, a word cannot be unspoken, it is not a game where you can load an older save when things go south.

I explained that already.

4 hours ago, Ygrain said:

.How very convenient, to let others do the work when you don't even want to hear, or do you?

This just proves you dont read/remember whats said at all. 

I said numorous times im 99% sure R+L=J, i figured out the clues to it while reading the books, before seen anything online. I pointed out a reason why this may not be the case, 

4 hours ago, Ygrain said:

There is a summation of the evidence in the OP of each pinned thread. You may want to read it.

Believe me, in my time at the forums, seen it all. 

Besides, it's not like you are offering anything else, are you?

Um read above.....

4 hours ago, Ygrain said:

Besides, that's what the discussion is for - you want information, you get it.

 

ETA: Anyway, this is going in circles. If you are not satisfied with explanations why it might make sense for Ned not to tell Jon, there's nothing to be done. Unless you have other  questions pertaining to the other RLJ stuff, I'm out.

You havent given me any information, all you've done is to try justfy Ned not telling jon the truth.

While i pointed out why he should of i took a specific time, and gave several reasons why he should of at that moment and said maybe the reason  he didnt tell him was because there was nothing to tell him on it,

If you believe jon deserved to know nothing before made a choice (that made it impossible) for him to ever embrace his true heritage then thats fine, thats your opinion.  

Your entire argument for ned not telling jon is civil war and jons life in danger etc and as i pointed out telling jon isnt telling everyone in westeros, hes life is in danger anyway at the wall, etc and given how he handled his family basically wiped out bit by bit that proves he could of handled it, and Ned should of known enough of jons character to know that, given not an awful lot of time passed between those events to alter jons character enough to of changed that. 

Which begs the question, maybe he didnt tell him because was nothing to tell? That is a more then fair thought and more then enough to question the validity of the R+L=J. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ned thinks desperately about wanting to see Jon and tell him something when he is in the Black Cells. Why then, if Ned has nothing to tell Jon?

 

'The thought of Jon filled Ned with a sense of shame, and a sorrow too deep for words. If only he could see the boy again, sit and talk with him … pain shot through his broken leg, beneath the filthy grey plaster of his cast. He winced, his fingers opening and closing helplessly.'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Ser Leftwich said:

Ned thinks desperately about wanting to see Jon and tell him something when he is in the Black Cells. Why then, if Ned has nothing to tell Jon?

 

'The thought of Jon filled Ned with a sense of shame, and a sorrow too deep for words. If only he could see the boy again, sit and talk with him … pain shot through his broken leg, beneath the filthy grey plaster of his cast. He winced, his fingers opening and closing helplessly.'

I am not saying you're wrong, just pointing out that a father (or father figure) that believes he might never see his son again, might wish to talk to him, maybe just to give him advice, or maybe just to share more time with him that he thought he would have. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, IronBars said:

Which begs the question, maybe he didnt tell him because was nothing to tell? That is a more then fair thought and more then enough to question the validity of the R+L=J. 

Since I'm not entirely clear anymore what the aim of the discussion was, I'll make this my last post on the matter::o

To me, the idea that Ned could possibly have "nothing to tell" is incorrect. Regardless of who Jon's mother was there is something for Ned to tell because her identity is still a secret even to this day. So, it isn't a question unique to RLJ by any means. Ned chose to continually withhold this information from Jon for some reason. Hence, justifications et al presented because there must be a reason why he didn't tell Jon. 

I know you have said several times that you are "99%" sure RLJ is true but in the case of your idea, the best I can suggest is maybe roll back the question at hand to open up the discussion to outside of RLJ? As I said, Ned's continued silence over the matter is an issue relevant to all Jon Snow mother theories. Yes, a lot of people will still look at the question through the lens of RLJ but by removing the pre-set assumption of who Jon's mother is altogether you allow alternative theorists and the people who don't have a strong opinion either way to say what they think. Take RLJ completely out of the equation, take every Jon's mother theory out of the equation and leave the simple question of "Why didn't Ned tell Jon who his mother is before he joined the NW?"

9 hours ago, Ser Leftwich said:

Ned thinks desperately about wanting to see Jon and tell him something when he is in the Black Cells. Why then, if Ned has nothing to tell Jon?

 

'The thought of Jon filled Ned with a sense of shame, and a sorrow too deep for words. If only he could see the boy again, sit and talk with him … pain shot through his broken leg, beneath the filthy grey plaster of his cast. He winced, his fingers opening and closing helplessly.'

8 hours ago, Lost Melnibonean said:

I am not saying you're wrong, just pointing out that a father (or father figure) that believes he might never see his son again, might wish to talk to him, maybe just to give him advice, or maybe just to share more time with him that he thought he would have. 

True, though it is interesting it is only Jon he feels this way about and none of his other children in this moment. Context is key here once again, if I recall correctly, this bit happens in the Black Cells after Varys presents the possibility that Cersei will arrange for Ned to join the Night's Watch, to be with "your brother and that baseborn son of yours."

So, all this 'sense of shame, and a sorrow too deep for words' that hits Ned at the thought of Jon might not from the fear that he might never see his son again but the carrot being dangled before him; prospect that he will see Jon again, at that infamous place where all past honours, sins and crimes are forgotten and you start anew, and alleviate this shame and sorrow "if only" he could sit and talk with Jon. That might lend weight to the idea that Ned wants to get something off his chest rather than a general longing to see his son again.

Ugh, sorry if that doesn't make sense. It's well past my bedtime :blush:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Faera said:

Since I'm not entirely clear anymore what the aim of the discussion even was, I'll make this my last post on the matter::o

As far as I'm concerned, the idea that Ned could possibly have "nothing to tell" is incorrect and . Regardless of who Jon's mother was there is something for Ned to tell because her identity is still a secret even to this day. So, it isn't a question unique to RLJ by any means. Ned chose to continually withhold this information from Jon for some reason. Hence, justifications et al presented.

I know you have said several times that you are "99%" sure RLJ is true but in the case of your idea, the best I can supposed is maybe roll back the question at hand to open up the discussion to outside of RLJ? As I said, Ned's continued silence over the mother is an issue relevant to all Jon Snow mother theories. Yes, a lot of people will still look at the question through the lens of RLJ because it is the most popular theory but by removing the pre-set assumption of who Jon's mother is altogether you allow alternative theorists and, perhaps most importantly, the people who don't have a strong opinion either way to provide their opinion. Take RLJ completely out of the equation, take every Jon's mother theory out of the equation and leave the simple question of "Why didn't Ned tell Jon who his mother is before he joined the NW?"

True, though it is interesting it is only Jon he feels this way about and none of his other children in this moment. Context is key here once again, if I recall correctly, this bit happens in the Black Cells after Varys presents the possibility that Cersei will arrange for Ned to join the Night's Watch, to be with "your brother and that baseborn son of yours."

So, all this 'sense of shame, and a sorrow too deep for words' that hits Ned at the thought of Jon might not from the fear that he might never see his son again but the carrot being dangled before him; prospect that he will see Jon again, at that infamous place where all past honours, sins and crimes are forgotten and you start anew, and alleviate this shame and sorrow "if only" he could sit and talk with Jon. That might lend weight to the idea that Ned wants to get something off his chest rather than a general longing to see his son again.

Ugh, sorry if that doesn't make sense. It's well past my bedtime :blush:

That, and RLJ being so obvious, is why I think @Ser Leftwich is probably right. Still, he might not have wanted to tell him the whole truth. We just don't know, I think. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Faera said:

So, all this 'sense of shame, and a sorrow too deep for words' that hits Ned at the thought of Jon might not from the fear that he might never see his son again but the carrot being dangled before him; prospect that he will see Jon again, at that infamous place where all past honours, sins and crimes are forgotten and you start anew, and alleviate this shame and sorrow "if only" he could sit and talk with Jon. That might lend weight to the idea that Ned wants to get something off his chest rather than a general longing to see his son again.

When Bran has that dream of Ned in the crypts, he says that Ned was sad, and it was something to do with Jon. It seems whatever he was feeling in life, he carried with him in death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Lost Melnibonean said:

That, and RLJ being so obvious, is why I think @Ser Leftwich is probably right. Still, he might not have wanted to tell him the whole truth. We just don't know, I think. 

Aha, well, I thought I'd play it coy considering recent events. But yes, it's made all the more annoying that Ned is now dead. The closest we'll ever get to knowing his motivations will be, at best, delivered by a third-party. Heck, if we're speculating, for all we know Lyanna specifically told Ned never to tell him who he really is. We won't know until we get a vision or dream of what happened... or they trot Howland Reed out to fill us in. If that. :mellow:

I agree whether Ned would ever have told Jon the truth is up in the air -- I think there are cases to be made that he'd have gone his whole life without uttering a word about who he mother really was. Silence is golden and it had served until that point despite the pain it caused him personally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Widow's Watch said:

When Bran has that dream of Ned in the crypts, he says that Ned was sad, and it was something to do with Jon. It seems whatever he was feeling in life, he carried with him in death.

That's another good point, and a sad one -- this idea that even in his final moments or in his ghostly state, he still had that shame and sadness about "something to do about Jon".

And more disturbing to Bran than even the crow dreams, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Lost Melnibonean said:

I am not saying you're wrong, just pointing out that a father (or father figure) that believes he might never see his son again, might wish to talk to him, maybe just to give him advice, or maybe just to share more time with him that he thought he would have. 

That doesn't explain why Ned should feel shame. Also, the below.

4 hours ago, Widow's Watch said:

When Bran has that dream of Ned in the crypts, he says that Ned was sad, and it was something to do with Jon. It seems whatever he was feeling in life, he carried with him in death.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, IronBars said:

You havent given me any information, all you've done is to try justfy Ned not telling jon the truth.

Some secrets are best kept hidden. Some secrets are too dangerous to share.

There you go, black on white, right from AGOT, what Ned thinks about the secret he is withholding from Jon. You may disagree with his assessment of  the situation but this is what Ned thinks, this is his assessment. You handwaving it, or rejecting when people are trying to explain why he might feel that way, doesn't change a thing. End.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ygrain said:

That doesn't explain why Ned should feel shame. Also, the below.

Sure it would. Eddard had kept the lie his whole life, and Jon suffered for not knowing the truth. Of course Jon would have suffered much more if Eddard had told the truth. And Eddard had just just failed his house versus Cersei. But I am not sure why I am arguing anymore...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ygrain said:

That doesn't explain why Ned should feel shame.

The simplest answer is that what Ned wanted to tell Jon was who his mother was.

Its all too easily assumed that Ned needed at some point to sit Jon down and tell him that he was the son of Rhaegar Targaryen, but the reality is that the question in Winterfell is the identity of his mother. Its been discussed above how a revelation that Jon was the son of Rhaegar Targaryen has political implications that put Jon's life in danger and/or put the realm in danger, but that doesn't account for the shame; the shame that Ned has never told Jon that his mother was Lyanna, Ned's beloved sister. From Ned's perspective that's the important thing, not Jon's father, whether he's Rhaegar Targaryen or Rumpelstiltskin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...