Wow, I Never Noticed That V.3 Eyes Wide Shut Edition

[Arya kiddin']

Sure, that's what Cersei means. But GRRM is also communicating to the audience there.

We've got threads and threads of examples where a certain line or lines operates on multiple levels. And that's exactly what's happening here.

Perhaps, but I'm not very sure on this one.

[CosimaistheHottest]

She also thinks of: Rhaegar’s little girl [...] She would have been my daughter. Here, Cersei imagines herself as the mother of Rhaegar's actual daughter.

Which then fits with: Rhaegar would be our king today and I would be his queen, the mother of his sons.

We know that the last part is hypothetical because Cersei does not know about R+L=J, and Rhaegar has only one official son. So it's a rather curious coincidence that Cersei managed to unintentionally and unknowingly convey this information. In fact, it's downright ironic.

This isn't some grand theory or anything, it's just another in a long line of R+L=J hints.

To Cersei, Rhaegar didn't have sons-plural. She feels that she could have given him many unlike Elia.

Not only that but Cersei lived in King's Landing for a while even during Elia's marriage, so she knew or at least met little Rhaenys on multiple occasions. Maybe Cersei took a liking to her because she was so cute and felt that Rhaenys should have been hers.

This is something that Martin probably really isn't trying to show any irony of. It really is just about Cersei thinking she could have been better for Rhaegar and the irony being that Rhaegar met her plenty of times and they lived in the same vicinity yet he ever ran off with her.

ED: It is just the audience/readers who latch onto to anything even if it truly means nothing. A couple of sentences and now Jeyne Westerling is pregnant with Robb's heir and she has been switched with her sister and carried away by the Blackfish. We have gotten none of that yet people are so sure over a hip comment and how pretty someone is comment made by two different people.

[J. Stargaryen]

Perhaps, but I'm not very sure on this one.

Black cats brought ill luck, as Rhaegar’s little girl had discovered in this very castle. She would have been my daughter, if the Mad King had not played his cruel jape on Father.

If she had only married Rhaegar as the gods intended, he would never have looked twice at the wolf girl. Rhaegar would be our king today and I would be his queen, the mother of his sons.

See which parts are italicized? That's from the book. Also, notice the use of "would have been" and "would be" in the two sections. Similar phrasing.

To Cersei, Rhaegar didn't have sons-plural. She feels that she could have given him many unlike Elia.

Not only that but Cersei lived in King's Landing for a while even during Elia's marriage, so she knew or at least met little Rhaenys on multiple occasions. Maybe Cersei took a liking to her because she was so cute and felt that Rhaenys should have been hers.

This is something that Martin probably really isn't trying to show any irony of. It really is just about Cersei thinking she could have been better for Rhaegar and the irony being that Rhaegar met her plenty of times and they lived in the same vicinity yet he ever ran off with her.

ED: It is just the audience/readers who latch onto to anything even if it truly means nothing. A couple of sentences and now Jeyne Westerling is pregnant with Robb's heir and she has been switched with her sister and carried away by the Blackfish. We have gotten none of that yet people are so sure over a hip comment and how pretty someone is comment made by two different people.

Exactly! But since he actually does have more than one son, the statement is ironic. Do you think GRRM accidentally set up an ironic R+L=J hint?

[Arya kiddin']

Well yes, it can be an Easter Egg thingy for more attentive fans.

[CosimaistheHottest]

To Cersei, Rhaegar didn't have sons-plural. She feels that she could have given him many unlike Elia.

Not only that but Cersei lived in King's Landing for a while even during Elia's marriage, so she knew or at least met little Rhaenys on multiple occasions. Maybe Cersei took a liking to her because she was so cute and felt that Rhaenys should have been hers.

This is something that Martin probably really isn't trying to show any irony of. It really is just about Cersei thinking she could have been better for Rhaegar and the irony being that Rhaegar met her plenty of times and they lived in the same vicinity yet he ever ran off with her.

ED: It is just the audience/readers who latch onto to anything even if it truly means nothing. A couple of sentences and now Jeyne Westerling is pregnant with Robb's heir and she has been switched with her sister and carried away by the Blackfish. We have gotten none of that yet people are so sure over a hip comment and how pretty someone is comment made by two different people.

You should have highlighted the other sentence. She feels she could have given him the many sons that Elia couldn't.

Exactly! But since he actually does have more than one son, the statement is ironic. Do you think GRRM accidentally set up an ironic R+L=J hint?

I don't think it is meant to be ironic. She is talking about her sons with him not anyone else's

[J. Stargaryen]

You should have highlighted the other sentence. She feels she could have given him the many sons that Elia couldn't.

I don't think it is meant to be ironic. She is talking about her sons with him not anyone else's

No, I shouldn't have highlighted the other sentence because it's a point I already acknowledged in the first post on the topic.

You need to get a new argument, dude. The literal meaning does not preclude a figurative one. They exist in parallel. That's how symbolism, foreshadowing, etc. works.

For example, if/when a character says something like: "There's a storm on the horizon." -- that could be used to convey two pieces of information: 1) the literal storm. Rain, wind, thunder, lightning; 2) the figurative storm, which usually just means some sort of trouble.

[protar]

See which parts are italicized? That's from the book. Also, notice the use of "would have been" and "would be" in the two sections. Similar phrasing.

Exactly! But since he actually does have more than one son, the statement is ironic. Do you think GRRM accidentally set up an ironic R+L=J hint?

It's italicised because those lines are her thoughts. Not how they switch to first person. To me, it seems like far too much of a passing, coincidental phrase to be seen as intentional symbolism. Knowing R+L=J you can retroactively attribute meaning to all sorts but it doesn't mean it was true.

[J. Stargaryen]

It's italicised because those lines are her thoughts. Not how they switch to first person. To me, it seems like far too much of a passing, coincidental phrase to be seen as intentional symbolism. Knowing R+L=J you can retroactively attribute meaning to all sorts but it doesn't mean it was true.

It's all inner monologue.

And, honestly, its passing and coincidental that she thinks she could have been mother to Rhaegar's little girl and then thinks she could have been mother to his (hypothetical) sons? Sure.

Cersei references Rhaenys. Not by name, but she refers to her specifically as "Rhaegar's little girl." In other words, she mentions Rhaegar's actual – not hypothetical – daughter. But later she doesn't mention Aegon. Instead she goes the hypothetical route with the "sons" line. But, we know that this line could work just as well as a reference (from the author, not Cersei) to Rhaegar's actual sons, since he has more than one of them.

[CosimaistheHottest]

It's all inner monologue.

And, honestly, its passing and coincidental that she thinks she could have been mother to Rhaegar's little girl and then thinks she could have been mother to his (hypothetical) sons? Sure.

Cersei references Rhaenys. Not by name, but she refers to her specifically as "Rhaegar's little girl." In other words, she mentions Rhaegar's actual – not hypothetical – daughter. But later she doesn't mention Aegon. Instead she goes the hypothetical route with the "sons" line. But, we know that this line could work just as well as a reference (from the author, not Cersei) to Rhaegar's actual sons, since he has more than one of them.

With Rhaenys, Cersei actually knew her unlike Aegon. Rhaenys probably had attributes that Cersei wanted in a daughter and to Cersei, Rhaenys was also an extension of Rhaegar. When people use sentences like that "she should have been mine", it probably means I should have had his daughter or that little girl was so amazing/cute that I would want her for my daughter.

[protar]

It's all inner monologue.

And, honestly, its passing and coincidental that she thinks she could have been mother to Rhaegar's little girl and then thinks she could have been mother to his (hypothetical) sons? Sure.

Cersei references Rhaenys. Not by name, but she refers to her specifically as "Rhaegar's little girl." In other words, she mentions Rhaegar's actual – not hypothetical – daughter. But later she doesn't mention Aegon. Instead she goes the hypothetical route with the "sons" line. But, we know that this line could work just as well as a reference (from the author, not Cersei) to Rhaegar's actual sons, since he has more than one of them.

Sure, because she's thinking about Rhaenys whereas in the other scenario she's just thinking of children in general, rendered as sons in because this is Westeros' male-centric society. There's nothing more to it than that.

And yes it all her inner monologue but the italicised monologue is in first person. That is why it is italicised not to create any specific emphasis.

[J. Stargaryen]

Sure, because she's thinking about Rhaenys whereas in the other scenario she's just thinking of children in general, rendered as sons in because this is Westeros' male-centric society. There's nothing more to it than that.

And yes it all her inner monologue but the italicised monologue is in first person. That is why it is italicised not to create any specific emphasis.

Except that Rhaegar coincidentally already had more than one son? He didn't need Cersei to give him "sons." He was able to achieve his second son by looking to the "wolf girl." Nothing to see here? Move along?

What about the similar phrasing? What about the fact that in both cases Cersei is imagining herself as Rhaegar's wife and mother to his actual and hypothetical children? Still passing and coincidental?

[protar]

Except that Rhaegar coincidentally already had more than one son? He didn't need Cersei to give him "sons." He was able to achieve his second son by looking to the "wolf girl." Nothing to see here? Move along?

What about the similar phrasing? What about the fact that in both cases Cersei is imagining herself as Rhaegar's wife and mother to his actual and hypothetical children? Still passing and coincidental?

Yes, I would say so. You are of course entitled to think otherwise.

[The Wolf Lord's Daughter]

I never realized that when Arya was working with the waif in her last chapter in feast and asked whether Basillik's blood worked on dogs, she had put two and two together about how Jaquen killed Weese.

"Weese was sprawled across the cobbles, his throat a red ruin, eyes gaping sightlessly up at the grey cloud. His ugly spooted dog stood on his chest, lapping at the blood pulsing from his neck and every so often ripping a mouthful of flesh out of the dead man's face."

[Rooseman]

I never realized that when Arya was working with the waif in her last chapter in feast and asked whether Basillik's blood worked on dogs, she had put two and two together about how Jaquen killed Weese.

"Weese was sprawled across the cobbles, his throat a red ruin, eyes gaping sightlessly up at the grey cloud. His ugly spooted dog stood on his chest, lapping at the blood pulsing from his neck and every so often ripping a mouthful of flesh out of the dead man's face."

I was going to post this a few days ago, but I was too lazy to look up Weese's name. :)

[Rooseman]

Sansa and Cersei have rather different understandings of the fate of Simon Toyne. According to Sansa,

That's terrible enough. But according to Cersei,

I think in AGoT, Bran tells someone about the fate of either Rickard or Brandon, and says that he was beheaded by the Mad King. Apparently, they thought their real fate was too gruesome to tell a boy like Bran.

[RumHam]

I think in AGoT, Bran tells someone about the fate of either Rickard or Brandon, and says that he was beheaded by the Mad King. Apparently, they thought their real fate was too gruesome to tell a boy like Bran.

I never picked up on that before. Apparently it was ok to tell him about rape, just not burning people.

“And there’s my grandfather, Lord Rickard, who was beheaded by Mad King Aerys. His daughter Lyanna and his son Brandon are in the tombs beside him. Not me, another Brandon, my father’s brother.

They’re not supposed to have statues, that’s only for the lords and the kings, but my father loved them so much he had them done.”

“The maid’s a fair one,” Osha said.

“Robert was betrothed to marry her, but Prince Rhaegar carried her off and raped her,”

[Rooseman]

I never picked up on that before. Apparently it was ok to tell him about rape, just not burning people.

It's possible that he has overheard that somewhere. I don't think Catelyn or Eddard told him about this, since Bran doesn't even know what sex is. Why would they tell him about rape, if he couldn't comprehend what that even means?

[Usrnmhsnomning]

I think that re Cersei/Rhaegar and the "sons" and "daughter" comments, we're forgetting about the fact that Cersei DOES have two sons and a daughter. She's just projecting her own kids onto her fantasy of marrying Rhaegar.

And as for the whole beheading thing, don't forget even Catelyn didn't know exactly how Rickard and Brandon died. I actually don't think it was made public knowledge how it happened, although obviously the leadership of the rebellion found out and several other key characters who were probably privy to the scene itself knew about it.

[The Crow's Third Eye]

Not sure if this is right or not but...

In SoS, Daenerys possibly shows further ignorance to her family's somewhat questionable past:

"Children's stories, if truth be told, too simple and fanciful to be true. All the heroes were tall and handsome and you could tell traitors by their shifty eyes. Yet she loved them all the same. Last night she had been reading of three princesses in the red tower, locked away by the King for the crime of being beautiful."

I am not really great with westeros history but this to me sounds like Baelor the Blessed and the Maidenvault no? And Dany dismisses it as fantasy. Given that it comes after her judgement of Barristan and Jorah, with Barristan's Viserys was your father's son thing and Dany refusing to believe Aerys was mad, I think it could possibly be another nod to her ignorance of familial madness?

[Iona]

Just noticed something from the Sworn Sword...

Dunk needs to assign last names for the peasants he and Bennis are training, and the various Wats become Beans, Melons and Barleycorns. They are observed to be thrilled for having these "lordly names". It seems their families kept using the names as well, since we have a Tom Barleycorn in the Night's Watch - in ADWD he was with Jon and the new recruits when they headed out to swear their vows at the weirwood grove.