Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About corbon

  • Rank
    Council Member

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

5,534 profile views
  1. No, it isn't obvious. We have no indication in any form about why the women think that, and what data they base it on. It is at least as like as not that they have no actual knowledge of the White Walkers beyond the odd far and fear-ed sighting, and they base the "brother's" statement entirely on Craster taking the boys out to die.... I mean 'be sacrificed to the Cold Gods'. That the babes are transformed into something powerful, and remain together, is more palatable than murder, psychologically speaking, and humans are prone to believing what they psychologically need, regardless of evidence or the lack thereof. Congratulations though. You've got me and @Melifeather arguing the same angle from the same data. I didn't think that was psychologically possible.
  2. The concept of subconscious knowledge isn't for everyone, apparently.
  3. ok, so you do subscribe to the idea that Robert believes murderer-rapists and their victims are together in the afterlife.
  4. How does that fit with her being 'had' by Rhaegar after they died? He didn't acknowledge it, agreed that far at least. I think he literally convinced himself that his own narrative was true even when underneath he 'knew' it wasn't. His own confused, frustrated words were that despite him killing Rhaegar, Rhaegar still 'won' - Rhaegar 'had' Lyanna while he was stuck with Cersei. In short, he 'knew' that Rhaegar wasn't Lyanna's rapist and murderer, he just couldn't accept it. But even as he denied any such possibility, he 'knew' it enough for his own clear 'reality' to be confused and inconsistent. Or do you subscribe to the idea that Robert believes that murderer/rapists get to 'have' their victims in the afterlife as well?
  5. But... Rhaegar has her. So is he going to fight Rhaegar for her again? Do you see the inconsistency between thinking that Rhaegar 'has' her because they are both dead but Robert will 'have her' now he's dead and Rhaegar is irrelevant? The funny thing is, there are a multitude of hints that there was something other than kidnap, rape and abuse going no between Rhaegar and Lyanna. And only one contemporaneous source, a source with no verifiable access to the real data, Robert, who claims rape. So its not really a surprise that even Robert, with his claims of rape, appears to subconsciously not believe his own hate-propaganda. @freninour Weltanschauung are just too different.
  6. We know that post-Harrenhal Rhaegar was on-track (prophecy wise) with Elia when Aegon was born. He at that stage believed Aegon was the PtwP and there must be a third head of the dragon. Probably shortly after that the maesters confirmed Elia's health could not sustain another pregnancy - that must have come as a shock. It may well have been the stimulus for the long trip he subsequently took off on which ended with the 'kidnap' of Lyanna. We know that trip 'ultimately' lead him 'back' to the Riverlands and Lyanna. Reasonable suggestions for 'stops' along the way on that trip include Summerhall (his regular muse) and High Heart (the GoHH prophesied related to the PtwP before - and HH is in the Riverlands, so 'ultimately...back to' would fit)... I think its very likely that neither Lyanna nor anyone else was on his radar prophecy-wise at Harrenhal, and only after Elia was ruled out as the mother of the third head, did he start thinking of alternative options. I think its likely he met Lyanna secretly at Harrenhal (Aerys instructed him to find the KotLT, and with the KotLT publicly telling his (her) opponents to teach their squires honour, it wouldn't take much quiet investigation for an intelligent man like Rhaegar to figure out the truth. I also think, despite the other political machinations potentially going on at Harrenhal, his choice of Lyanna as QoLaB was entirely about her actions as KotLT. HR isn't necessary here though. We already know Rhaegar is a student of history and prophecy and familiar with the Song of Ice and Fire (which he believed was Aegon's). Its therefore extremely likely that he was aware of the Pact of Ice ad Fire (which the Targaryens had never held up their end of). I think if you throw in the unsealed Pact of Ice and Fire, the Song of Ice and Fire being relevant to the PtwP, Elia's inability to bear the third head of the dragon, Lyanna's performance of the KotLT, and Rhaegar's likely knowledge of that, you get a pretty clear pointer towards Rhaegar getting very very interested in Lyanna as the mother of either the third head or tPtwP. But probably only once Elia is ruled out and he needs to find a new mother, so he has to rethink his plan. And yes, the warrior-queen mother may further contribute. I just don't see the need for HR in this process. He has the clues already, if he really thinks about them with fresh eyes. Yes. It did. There are several months at least, possibly up to 6 months or so but likely 2-3 months, between Harrenhal and Aegon's birth and Rhaegar''s subsequent trip. Then the trip itself is months long. Anywhere from 2-6, most likely in the 3-4 range. So we have 4-12 months for this to take, most likely around 5-7 months. This timing is carefully calculated (by others mostly) from a wide variety of factors including time 'forward' in Robert's rebellion and time 'backward' to the origins of Harrenhal well before the false spring even began. The crowning has been made hugely significant in our eyes, due to subsequent events. But in itself, its not (it can be, but is not always, not in itself). If Oswell Whent had won the tourney, he would have crowned his un-named niece (he was one of her 5 original champions). If Barristan the Bold had won, he thinks he would have crowned Ashara Dayne. Rhaegar won, and crowed Lyanna (IMO because of tKotLT) which was a shock because he, known to be dutiful and scandal-free, was expected to name his wife. But note that beyond the immediate reactions, nothing actually comes of this for months and months. We have heard no hint of any fallout or scandal or anything further (as yet at least) until probably 6 months later when a new 'event' changes everything. Instead we have Rhaegar returning home with Elia, still apparently on track with her, prophecy wise, and satisfied with that situation. The Starks etc, and everybody else, go on with their business. The only hint of scandal originating from Harrenhal appears to be the disgrace of Ashara Dayne, who looked to Stark. And the next we hear of her she's at home in Starfall a year and a half or more later, apparently grieving over a lost baby and maybe more, enough to suicide. The scene with Elia and Aegon is counter-indicative of Rhaegar 'falling in love' with Lyanna at Harrenhal. Which is fine. Like you I think he comes across and is described by those who knew him as not at all the sort of person to pull a crazy stunt like that. So likely, he didn't. And there are better alternative explanations anyway. Well said, I agree.
  7. Robert is not a deep or subtle thinker. Its absurd to think that he believes something highly contrary to the usual cultural narrative when there is a clear and obvious and very easy fit. Its just as absurd to take everything at face value despite contrary evidence, just because it suits your argument. So, is he straightforward, or complex? He's complex of course, we all are. And self contradictory too - we all are to one extent or another, Robert just more than most because he's an emotional coward that runs away from hard truths. Why is he self destructive? Why can't he move past the distant past? There's your problem. The more messed up one is, the less 'face value' there is in one's words. Robert is a very messed up individual. This is a bit pointless and circular. I say Robert's own words point to his subconscious 'knowing' something different than his conscious beliefs, because thats what the usual meaning of those phrases, in that context, would mean. And because Robert's own words are self-contradictory at different times. You ignore the usual meaning and insist that his words can only show his conscious beliefs, so he must uniquely believe some pretty weird shit. Even when his beliefs are self-contradictory. We aren't going to agree. To admit something, you have to believe it. He hasn't changed his conscious belief about Lyanna/Rhaegar, even on his deathbed. So there can be no admitting it even now. Because there is no indication of any great 'revelation'. He doesn't have any new information that 'changes things'. Therefore he already 'knew' the stuff he admits, he just refused to admit it before. He's just facing up to what he already knew now because he can finally do it without having to actually do anything about it. I'm not sure I parsed that right because its barely intelligible. Of course he 'knew' it before. How could he not? He knew he was terribly irresponsible and his behaviour was atrocious. Nothing has changed. And there you go. Admitting yourself that he always knew it, has done for years now. Except he doesn't, does he? He tells Ned to let Dany live. Its not like they suddenly became less of an issue for the kingdom or for his dynasty now. He knew it was wrong before, and he knew Ned was right. He just wouldn't face it honestly. Ahh, no. Others are irrelevant to a person's core. Thats his excuse for not facing the truth, not his real truth. If it was, he wouldn't be changing his mind on his deathbed. You honestly don't understand the concept? He has chosen to believe a certain thing. But he must also have some data that he knows contradicts the thing he has fiercely chosen to believe. Because his unconscious mind has processed differently to his conscious mind and the truth he refuses to believe slips out unconsciously, Freudianly I guess. Its nothing to do with the sixth sense. Its about fierce devotion to a narrative that rules iron belief in that narrative, regardless on any evidence. And when there is evidence that contradicts the chosen narrative that often leads to cognitive dissonance and mental instability. Which is a large part of why Robert is so terrible as a person. He self hates, and so self-destructs, in part at least, because deep inside he knows his worldview is built upon hollow foundations. None of them touch his core. They only touch his superficial image. His Kingship, etc., external things. His core is who he is as a person, the individual, stripped of all the worldly trappings. Whether he is worthy of love, more than anything else. And thats why he can't accept Rhaegar and Lyanna being a voluntary thing. Because that would mean Lyanna rejected him, which leaves him loveless, unworthy of being loved. Just because he said something doesn't mean he truly believed it. Is that so difficult to comprehend? Just because you refuse to understand a clear distinction, doesn't make it arbitrary. You understand better than that, which leads me to believe you are trolling here. The context of 'reuniting', of 'having' of 'being with' in this situation goes vastly beyond mere joint locale and basic interaction. And you understand this. Indeed. Which is contradictory to his earlier words, isn't it? Because Rhaegar 'has her' now (then). But Rhaegar isn't relevant in his mind at the end. Either Rhaegar 'has' her, in which case its a problem when Robert dies too, or Rhaegar doesn't 'have' her. Apparently its both. Your own argument is self defeating. Rhaegar has her now because they are both dead, together, Yet Rhaegar is not an issue once Robert is dead too and the three of them will be together. Your position doesn't resolve this. My position does. Robert's conscious mind dismisses Rhaegar because he chooses to believe that he and Lyanna were always destined for each other and he will be with her in the afterlife. Robert's unconscious mind doesn't agree, hence a Freudian slip (which he didn't even notice) when he was angry which is in complete opposition of his expressed beliefs Your argument is that Robert is straightforward. Or is it complex? Your argument denies that people have internal contradictions. That Robert believes that Rhaegar 'has' Lyanna because they are both dead, but that apparently dead Rhaegar is irrelevant and will just magically fade out of the picture once dead Robert joins Lyanna. There are no revelations on his deathbed. No new information. Therefore, what he knew when dying was only what he knew all along.
  8. Thats absurd. Of course they are not. These things inform a character's beliefs at a very deep level - deeper than their conscious choices usually. No, they aren't. Nothing about Robert (psychologically) is straightforward. Thats why he's such a mess. Robert is presented to us as a very human, flawed, failed even (despite his status and advantages) person. We see often how much he is in denial about things, seeing only what suits him. How he 'sees' things is a complex picture made up of both his conscious choices and beliefs and the things his unconscious mind can work out even when he chooses to ignore them on a conscious level. The same is true for any human being, though some have a stronger or weaker facility for self delusion on a superficial level. Robert isn't stupid, only weak. Taking everything that Robert says at face value only ignores everything about GRRM's writing. His characters are human, flawed, and many lie even to themselves, even on their deathbeds. But you can see how they really think and feel in cues in their behaviour and sometimes speech. Robert knew he was a terrible person and worse king, thats part of why he drunk and whored so much, These are things he didn't want to admit before. He knew them, he just chose to state otherwise or ignore them. Hardly something he didn't know before. He knew what he was doing then, he just wouldn't face up to it and change. There was no great 'revelation' on his deathbed here. Admitting it now, on his deathbed, doesn't change anything about his self image. Or make him actually face it - Ned's the one who has to face the results, as Robert indicates. Same again. There is no great 'revelation' here. He knew it was wrong before, and thats part of the reason he was so angry with Ned for defying him - he knew Ned was right, he just wouldn't admit it. These things are very different from the Rhaegar/Lyanna situation. That one touches Robert's core as a person in a way that the superficialities of rulership do not. He has internalised his own narrative so deeply that he believes it. Thus there is no change on his deathbed. He hasn't been 'lying' about the kidnapping, rape and murder, because he truly believes it. Yet somehow, his unconscious knows its not true. And thus, it slips out in subtle fashion in an unguarded moment of anger, reflecting the reality his heart understands even though his head has chosen a different truth, And he doesn't even notice, because it was unguarded, subtle, and noticing it would cause severe emotional issues for him at a very deep level. As far as his conscious mind goes, he never was 'denying' it. He has chosen the narrative he believes and since it touches his core, he really believes it, even as he lies dying. Its only his subconscious that betrays his cognitive dissonance. As always with cognitive dissonance, he can't see it himself. Instead it shows in unconscious ways - in his mis-behaviour (due to self-hate) rather than in his thoughts. Except, he makes no mention of being 'reunited' with her, or 'together' with her. Even now he doesn't think she's 'his', that they'll be 'reunited' or forever together' or that now he'll 'take her' back from Rhaegar or anything. Even though ne would think that would be his focus. All Robert indicates is that he thinks he will have an opportunity to see Lyanna, to give her Ned's love. Because they'll both be in the place of death. Projecting are we? Funny how your statement that Robert and Lyanna will now be 'reunited' doesn't match what Robert actually says. Being 'reunited' or 'together in death' is something significantly more than just jointly present and able to interact - which is all that Robert indicates.
  9. Thats not how it works though. Rhaegar doesn't 'get' Lyanna just because they are both dead, In fact, it should be the very opposite - if Rhaegar was Lyanna's captor and rapist then in death, even shared death, she should be 'free' of him. Robert's 'reasoning' is clearly counter to all normal cultural beliefs about the afterlife. That doesn't matter to him, because Robert is is willing to accept cognitive dissonance rather than face a hard truth. Thats part of the reason why he's such a weak and lost individual, drowning himself in alcohol and cheap and meaningless sex. What we see in the first passage is Robert unconsciously expressing the knowledge that his conscious mind refuses to acknowledge or accept. He doesn't even realise the meaning of what he's said. Too busy 'feeling' (wallowing) to think. That expression is his conscious mind, which blocks off the knowledge he doesn't want to accept, expressing its chosen belief. That its inconsistent with his unconscious mind understanding the reality is entirely consistent with Robert's character throughout AGoT.
  10. Thats not a logical corollary from her words. Warning someone not to try (the relevant word from Leaf was seek) to do something is not an indication you believe they could do it. Its an indication you believe they might think they can do it. It is usually used in circumstances where the deed is either impossible, or the degree of risk vastly outweighs the degree of reward - ie its very dangerous and unlikely to succeed (or both, impossible and attempts can lead to disastrous results). That is not to say that her words explicitly indicate it to be impossible. Just that the implication from them is in the opposite direction of how you are using it. Because merely trying (whether succeeding or not) could cause great harm? To him or others? Because its impossible and therefore a great waste of effort and energy and focus? Because it might succeed and the result of success could be worse than not trying? I'm sure there are more possibilities, these are just from the tip of my head. In general, I'd just like to say I find the Red dragon/3headed dragon conversation very interesting, thanks all. I don't have anything to add to it, but I am enjoying listening.
  11. Its not just interpretation. You presented a fact that was not. There is no pair of Frey siblings that have the same name and no indication that there will be. There are one pair of brother with apparently the same name, but the mocking of their mother for that very thing points to the exact opposite of how you used it. It shows that sibling swith eth same name is not a thing, when you were arguing it as being a thing. I just go with Jon. GRRM said that Ned named him. I don't see any reason we have to invent a dying Lyanna giving him another name, nor Rhaegar who likely died well before he was born and probably hadn't been present with Lyanna for months before the birth instructing her to give him one (and her having the strength to do it, or to tell Ned. As far as I am concerned, even if Lyanna did name Jon, and died without telling Ned his name, then it is utterly irrelevant. But we have no evidence she did, and reason she may not have. Thinking about it a bit further, I suppose it could become relevant if there was a Maester present at the birth, which is possible but not indicated or necessary. And Wylla might know, if he was named. So it is. Thats my flaw. I see a mistaken claim of fact, I tend to point it out. If someone tries to defend their error instead of admitting it, and I have time, I'm likely to argue them back rather than let a falsehood stand. Too much of our society's ills are caused by falsehoods being accepted as truth. Sometimes that leads to a lot of text about what is effectively a pointless nothing. I'm not perfect. And I make mistakes sometimes too. Agreed.
  12. Thats because it is. Its not actually something we know, its just the speculation of a bunch of readers who might just fit that description fairly well - at least judging by their own words. Some of which are openly motivated by hate rather than reason. I prefer to note that Rhaegar was considered to be extremely intelligent, extremely able (above all) and dutiful. And that we don't know exactly what his actions were, nor the accurate context of them, let alone exactly what he was thinking or planning. I don't put much stock in 'stupid' or 'crazy' theoretical plans that he might have had, proposed by readers. Even less when those readers display their own limitations
  13. Thats not the main point there though. Even illiterate peasants mock the woman for her stupidity. Who about 50-50 might desire that ("as like as not") in the mocking opinion of Lord Walder. Its not actually a thing that she has expressed such desire. Its literally just old Lord Walder mocking his family for their over-obvious favour currying. And there is no indication it would be allowed. No one finds it as odd because they understand its not a thing.
  14. Your memory appears to be off. Please show associations of the red door with grass, flowers or mountains. There is one, and only one, association with grass, discussed below. There are zero associations of the red door with flowers or mountains. Certainly not. But the claim was (and I don't blame you personally, you indicated that you were merely repeating other's thoughts) was that Dany's memories didn't fit Braavos. Then cited not a memory, but an allegorical vision that didn't even originate from her. Thats either incompetent, or dishonest. Not by you, but by the originators of these ideas. It is one of many instances of the same sort of fake 'support' for the idea. I don't object to the idea as an idea, just the abuse of language and logic to generate fake support lines for it. In her vision, a little girl did run toward a red door. Barefoot even. But its not a memory. Its a vision given to her by the Undying ones. And given its context - a string of visions which include things that haven't been, maybe never will, maybe never were, and many that are clearly allegorical for example the dragon bursting from MMD's brow, or the blue flower in a wall of ice), one can't actually claim this vision as being certainly of a real event in any case. Nor is there any grass in it. The vision could fit perfectly fine in a Braavosi summer. It just doesn't need to. We assume its Dany, because she was a little girl and the red door is hugely symbolic for her in particular. But it fits perfectly as an allegory - she remains the lost (barefoot) little girl running towards 'home' (the red door ideal) without ever actually finding it (yet). Thats (still) the story of her life. Thats what the Undying Ones are showing her. Its simply a lie to call this a memory of hers that doesn't fit Braavos. The grass reference (the only one) you used is from a whole different experience and thought (different book even), her bad dreams while recovering from the MMD induced miscarriage. The red door features in those dreams through multiple locations, but always distant - a long hall with high stone arches (bare feet leaving bloody footprints on the stone), on the dothraki plain making love to Drogo, then talking to Jorah, then being abused by Viserys, then picturing her grown son Rheago, then running past the ghostly kings with gemstone eyes, then flying free as a dragon all the way across the Dothraki sea as she feels close to it and finally reaching it in a place with green fields and great stone houses (clearly Westeros - her metaphorical home). Thats got nothing to do with the real location of the actual red door. The red door in this dream is featured in multiple locations and clearly represents an idea, not a place. And the final place she 'reaches' the idea, home, clearly references a Westerosi ideal - grass fields and great stone houses, her final representation of 'home' - which is not where the real red door was. Well, you used the term sweet. And thats the only place it is used in connection with the red door (an scent or smell). Flowers? Not relevant to the red door any time. Perfumes, yes (scented oils in fact). Flowers no. Aemon was dying and poor, during Autumn - they couldn't afford expensive wood to heat his room so it was cold and that affects how his dying is perceived. Darry was sick and wealthy - at least living in a rich house with servants and exotic plants. Any any season, we don't know. So of course the circumstances are different, very different. Dany does not describe any outdoor memories from Braavos. Dany's memories inside a large and wealthy house through any or all seasons to Arya's experiences living poor, largely outdoors, in autumn, are apples and oranges. Of course they don't match up. And they shouldn't be. Thats such an old and poorly thought out counter. Aside for the fact that lemons comes from certain areas is simply natural worldbuilding, and not every reference to that idea (and there aren't as many as are touted) is a 'clue' to solve one very minor not-quite-oddity, we have a solution. The Pact, signed by Dorne (lemon tree) and Darry and witnessed by the Sealord of Braavos places Darry and Dany in Braavos. A Pact we didn't know about when the lemon tree was revealed.
  15. This one is accurate These two are simply wrong. The first is explicitly a vision she had (in the HotU - likely more metaphorical than 'real' anyway, as are the other visions), not a memory (and there's no grass either). The second is presented as something almost the opposite of how it is actually used in the text. The rest of the theory is full of similar basic comprehension ineptitude or deliberate misrepresentation. I'll not derail here by breaking it apart step by step, thats been done before in other threads. The only thing that can be said for it is that lemon trees are indeed not native to Braavos. Which is irrelevant in the house of a rich person, well sheltered and protected (the courts and gardens of the mighty are explicitly excepted from the generally treeless nature of the city).
  • Create New...