EggBlue

first of all , I'm really sorry for how people unjustly treated you. that sucks.. no , sins of ancestors shouldn't be defining people . that's not what I'm saying . I think we should make a distinction between what people can achieve or would do on their own and what's a promised result of prophecies (the later ,obviously, simply doesn't exist in our world) . Daenerys and Tyrion are already there in the book showing that children shouldn't be responsible for their fathers' deeds and that they can turn up exactly the opposite of them. Jon on the other hand is something different ;since his supposed father was effectively working towards the end result that seems to becoming Jon's destiny . it would have been different if Rhaegar was merely a lovestruck, reckless prince running away from everything (like in the show) . but Martin has gone his ways to inform us that the dead prince knew what was coming , was preparing for it and his story with Lyanna -as implied- was a part of it. I'm not looking for some grand moral message . but from what I've read there are a couple of things Martin seems to be saying ; call it message , rule , whatever... RLJ does cheapen the effect of one of these things that's already clearly established in his books ; something that he's telling us with Stannis's story and verbalizes through Marwin : trying to act on prophecies not only bites you in the ass , it also doesn't remotely result in what you intended . because although Rhaegar and his loved ones all died as contrary to what he wanted , he had achieved his main goal nonetheless.

the Nazi example is actually irrelevant since I've already said here (the bolded), I agree that it doesn't take away Jon Snow's achievements or heroic deeds whatever they'll be. Rhaegar and Lyanna could be beasts in form of humans for all I care. did I say we should punish Jon Snow for his parents' faults?! I'm saying that I find what it implies when the story is finished dissatisfying. let me try to explain it in another way... if Jon turns out to be the ultimate hero or something like that , it'll confuse the purpose of the story.. at least in my opinion. because, after it's finished , it gives the impression that whatever happened as consequences of R&L ( whatever their intentions may have been ) , was necessary to the larger picture ;and thus , downplays the consequences of their actions . which makes the dilemma of sacrifice* for greater good unresolved in the story; as contrary to what seems to be already being established in the books ( for example, Stannis who wanted kingship for good intentions and killed his brother and was about to kill his nephew for it seems to be doomed) . with their child as the guy who saves the day , it's like the rebellion and R&L's personal losses were worth it and the end result for those actions were eventually good. * by sacrifice I don't only mean to tie up someone to a stick for burning. I also mean sacrifice of duty/honor/etc. and unintentional sacrifice ,like causing a war as a result pf ignorance and carelessness. I hope I've been able to communicate my thoughts better this time... now, if you still think it's stupid , I don't know what else to tell you! I know my view won't change just yet, not unless new books shed some more light on this issue.

I don't know , George might be able to pull it off without writing two selfish or extremely stupid and irresponsible people whose mistakes unknowingly caused a brutal war. I just don't know how he could make it it doesn't take away Jon's achievements . but the paradox between this and Stannis's plotline with Edrick Storm is a huge negative point for the story and its author for me personally... still , depends on how it'll be written..

I'm 75% sure that R+L=>J (albeit, I'm adding seduction/deception and abduction/rape into the calculation) Yet, in my opinion, as impressively popular as it is, it sucks. I know at least the L and J part of the equation is confirmed but I hope R part doesn't turn out to be true if the books ever come out. - my biggest problem with this romantic tale isn't that Lyanna explicitly cared about "keeping to one bed" and that logically since she didn't know Rhaegar , she couldn't be sure he'd keep to 1-2 beds at most. - I don't complain that it also doesn't fit an able, single minded , dutiful guy and that seduction , abduction and lovestruck each contradict with said qualities respectively. - I can relate Rhaegar's utmost ignorance of his own actions leading to war in his last conversation with Jaimie to him suffering from bipolar disorder and depression and call it a day. - and I don't really care that most of the evidence in favor of this theory ( including KotLT , ToJ baby , annulment/marriage , etc. ) are not confirmed themselves and every question relating to them is usually answered with accepted hindsight of RLJ - I try not to pay attention to the fact that a lot of the fans are too inhumanly unfair to Elia Martell as a character by making up excuses for LR's bizarre love story by saying she couldn't have more babies , she was barren , she was weak , she was surrounded by maesters all the time ... - I can accept the fact that basically this whole theory with KotLT part is a "you're not like other girls, are you? ..." moment and then a makeover to a lady resulting in pretty flowers crown and later "fuck the country and our families ... let's elope!" - I'm not bringing up George's wife's claim about it being too obvious for George since honestly ,for all I care, it might be as simple as a marketing thing aiming at RLJ haters like me for keeping up reading the books! - I can even overlook the fact that Jon has zero dragon imagery in his chapters. his paternity side could be as relevant as Robb's maternal blood ,symbolically . now , doesn't matter that dragon blood is one of the most powerful magical bloods in the series. - heck , I honestly couldn't care less about the fact that Jon's arc doesn't seem to be heading towards a secret prince reveal ... we'd still have prophecy for him. no no no.... my biggest problem with this theory is that if it's true then R & L who abandoned their morality, duty and families and played house for a whole year while the country bled , have created a hero who would save the day... which means a driven-to-Lyanna-by-prophecy Rhaegar had deliberately sacrificed thousands of lives for the greater good. which means at the end of the day , the war and everything that happened during rebellion was necessary for the greater good! BUT , the books have already given us the scene about what a boy's life means with Stannis and Davos! that paradox there is my biggest issue with this particular theory... now, if Jon turns out to be not the hero but the main villain and the main problem , it would destroy the character completely ;yet, I could live with that! PS. volume 167? page 40? that's impressive..

I once saw a theory on youtube that said the Others behavior in the prologue was as if they were testing Waymar. then , it went on to say that maybe prince that was promised was a prince promised to the Others or that there is a prince promised to them other than AA (I think it was LML's). I should re-read the chapter...

they are honorable!

it just said she had a bump on her belly? not huge? so, at least 3-4 months.

honestly , this quote and everything else we've seen of him suggests to me that High Sparrow can potentially be one of the darkest characters in the books . and knowing Martin used to be a catholic and probably familiar with the concept of religious leaders misusing people's fear and misery, he must have created High Sparrow to be more of a villain in the story . Yet, when I put High Sparrow among top 5 monstrous characters right beside the likes of Tywin and Euron , people mock me!

I don't know . it might be a matter of perspective more than anything but I think it's insensitive of him to often talk of Jon's father's killer, friend or not , specifically from the time he put his hammer in Jon's father's chest(what other tale would be said of Trident?). he talks about Howland too but clearly he tells stories about Robert and not about Howland or Arthur Dayne or even Lyanna Stark ( Bran's knowledge about her seemed limited to general history and Arya was surprised to know she was like her aunt)

I just realized if Rhaegar's Jon's dad, then this quote makes Ned a total asshole in Jon's eyes whenever he knows of his parentage... we know from Bran's POV that Ned is not much of talker , he doesn't tell old tales about victories against famous knights if he doesn't want to (Arthur Dayne) , he doesn't talk about old parties even they have cool stories, etc. he has no obligation to talk about Robert so often and especially not about how he was demon of the Trident when he killed Jon's dad , how he was the fiercest warrior (so he could kill Jon's dad) and how he was a giant among princes (as compared to Jon's dad for example)! ... I wonder what he wanted to tell Jon when he saw him and talked to him?! " so .. yeah .. you are my sister's son with the Targaryen prince.. you know the one I told you how Bobby was a total badass when he slew... they fought for your mom..and I lied about your identity because when Lannisters killed your siblings Robert called them dragonspawns so I feared he might kill you as well.. by the way courtesy Robert's half-Lannister children who technically have taken you and your sibling's place .... don't worry ,though, you are not a child of rape.. that basically does make your father an innocent but whatever, you are in NW so don't even think about revenge or IT or any of that nonsense!.. " OUCH!

I suspect she didn't tell for the sake of Naerys too.. plus if you sleep with the biggest jerk in the family who happens to be married to your cousin -out of desperation from 10 year confinement , 3 unsuccessful escapes , disappointment of a too healthy brother/prisonkeeper , loneliness and lack of any other guy - you won't shout out about your affair afterwards either... anyways , the point is that Viserys was the only one with the power or influence to oppose her ... as I assume, the country was at peace and more united than ever . the fact that in spite of her confinement , her bastard and her lack of penis, still some thought she would be queen is telling. the world book says she didn't have powerful supporters , something Viserys had . he was too old to be a pawn so all I can think of is that Viserys took the throne because he wanted it. he probably thought it was his turn.

he did try to free them (and I believe it) but afterwards there was basically nothing to stop Daena from ascending the throne and legitimizing her own son (hell.. if Freys and Lannisters were planning on presenting Robb as the beast who slew everyone at the red wedding , then Daena could definitely present herself as the Maiden Mary in history books). Targaryens were one single faction, the realm was united due to dornish war and during the 10 years of Baelor's rule there was limited enmity with Dorne...yet for some reason Viserys took the throne knowing that it not only destroys his poor mother's legacy but it also puts AegonIV next in line! the more I think about Baelor , the more I come to the conclusion that his interest in religious corelated with his shame of being a deep deep pervert! he probably wanted all his sisters but since it contradicted his religious beliefs and it scared him he took an oath of celibacy and then due to jealousy towards others who might have them, he kept his sisters in Maidenvault.... OR he was another sort of psycho! look, there definitely is a chance that all your theories turn out to be true .from what I've read, you have gathered a good piece by piece set of evidence for each small theory. however , every small part is supported by yet another theory when you look at the large picture, which makes the whole thing a bit of a stretch... definitely a good read... but you cannot expect us to take them as facts and say "oh you guys don't get it ..only I do.." ! you might be right but yet again you might not. and it's not like a scientific fact that we can prove and set aside.. it's incomplete fiction in the head of one guy and all these are basically imagination of each of us! some theories are more supported than the rest but the bottom line is that these are all just guess games!

we shall see! ps. check out Artworks thread. I put something you'd like...well.. you , Corvo and Loras Tyrell:) In my head canon , Daemon B was actually a good guy forced in an impossible situation . so yeah , I think he probably had more relationship with Aemon -hero of all- than his absent selfish father. yeah.. the guy was sensitive tnx you're probably right agreed... almost. it would have been great if he either supported his poor niece's crown or disinherited his son in favor of his grandson... finally , someone with good shipping sense they'll even be parallel to Ashara the desirable maid and Shy Ned!

well.... Sansa will marry a Ned if that means anything! I thought Cregan might be popular , he sure seemed like a badass... I've got the feeling that Elaena was a bit of a kissass... I mean ... why wouldn't she support her own nephew?! as doomed as his cause might have been! there were two Targaryen naming that were particularly interesting to me: 1) Aegon III 's children: first of all his first son is named Daeron . closest paternal relative with the same name was Daeron the daring whom we can be pretty sure was not an inspiration to Aegon! but his father-in-law's name is also Daeron ... it seems to me there is at least one Targaryen king who seemed to care about his wife's opinion when it came to naming their firstborn. also, Baelor might be out of respect to Baela ( the same way she was named after Baelon) and Rhaena is obviously named after Aegon's other sister, Rhaena. 2) Daemon Blackfyre's twins were Aegon and Aemon . Aegon is a pretty standard Targ name but Aemon here is interesting since we are explicitly told that Daemon's dad did little to honor Aemon's memory but it seems Daemon did. Daemon's third son is also named after his father.

that was really interesting ... George might only be a romantic but I think it makes kinda sense. if you can't manage your lust you probably can't manage a country! regarding Jon Snow , I think whether he breaks his vows again won't exclude him from the pattern you found. he'd only be like Jaimie whose monogamy seemed to be intended as one of the earlier signs depicting him in a more positive light.

good (and sad) point... meanwhile , the characters who are called old seem to come back from dead! we've already talked about Loras calling Cat old and she comes back as LSH. and here's a quote for Beric: it's worth mentioning that (believe it or not!) , young curse had applied to young Lord Beric , too!

I mean you could at least say Rhaegar was inexperienced or something and what about Lewin Martell? he should've been able to see that... forget about the rebellion battles... George clearly just wanted an epic battle in a river and it seems he gave Bobby and co. a THICK plot armor in every single battle while he kinda forgot to give Rhaegar something other than looks to make it believable so many people had faith in him ...

I agree that it might be a red herring as in there won't be three dragons but three heros perhaps. but don't you think it's really weird that Rhaegar based his three heads necessity on their relatively new symbol? when Aegon and his sisters put up the three headed dragon as their sigil everybody thought it's because there's three of them.. but maybe three was actually a unique number for the Targaryens.. perhaps something related to the prophecy that Rhaegar had found? I mean.. he can't be that stupid

why did Torros resurrect Beric? it's not like they knew each other before tourney of the hand and it wasn't the first time Torros witnessed a good man die... so what was special? the same question for Beric and Cat... why did he save her? there were thousands of innocents and many of his friends who died but he didn't resurrect them.. why Cat?

Davos?! do tell..

technically yes but that doesn't seem like Stannis's style

Casterly Rock and Lannisport. in dance he says he knows Lannisport better than Kingslanding.

I was(am) confused about these birds in Dance it gives the impression that they recite the letters: but I went back to aGoT where it gave me the impression of mute kids: did I misunderstand the sentence?

I've got a few questions regarding Varys's little birds: what happens to them when they grow up? are they Essosi or Westerosi? are they slaves or are they hired?! are their tongues actually cut out?:/ I mean are they like Unsulied and are just mutes instead of euniques? or are they mute from birth?

the TV show also confirmed that Sansa is Jeyne Pool , Jon Snow is Aegon Targaryen and Beric Dondarion sells Gendry to a woman who most certainly wants to kill him. so, I'm not so sure anymore my friend.