Jump to content

R + L = J v 70


Stubby

Recommended Posts

I don't weigh it as heavily as Winds of Winter blow cold, but I do generally agree insomuch as Ned couldn't be sure that Cat could be trusted with the bombshell. I don't think Winds of Winter blow cold was necessarily insinuating that Catelyn was especially untrustworthy, but that seems to be the way you read it. I just don't think anybody could be trusted with it and Ned barely trusted himself with it, or at least didn't enjoy being in that position.

Yes, that probably is the case; and there was a risk in telling Cat. I used to exonerate Ned and defend his decision not to tell Cat but in retrospect I think not confiding in her was one of Ned's biggest failings, both personally and politically. The risks involved in divulging the truth about Jon to Cat seem to be exaggerated. Ned wasn't Tywin, maneuvering Jon into a position power, and it's seems no one cared about Ned's bastard way up north. There's a very remote risk that Cat would betray Ned and Jon if one of her children was threatened. Yet given the context of the books, how real is/was the threat of someone sussing the truth of Jon's parentage out, and more importantly, using this for some gain over Cat and her children?. Yet Cat gets an inordinate amount of flak for not embracing this tragic situation given the fact that she's wholly restricted from being anything important to Jon since Ned appears to exercise complete control in any important decisions for the child.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never met the guy, who is in any case a character in a work of fiction, so "hate" is entirely the wrong word.

That being said, I do consider him vastly overrated on these here pages :cool4:

Actually you can hate a character in the book, while hate is often triggered by emotion, it more closely associated to disposition and attitude. Weather he is overrated or not is subjective to the individual reader, a natural conflict exists when one finds something different than another. It would suggest your dislike of the character stems from the fans and not the character. This can in turn be compounded by the fact that you are on a social site, most people will congregate to one idea or another and fall in line with certain beliefs in order to find acceptance, thus groups are formed, further compounding the problem as it is no longer an annoying individual but an entire group. The more people overrate the character the more likely it will drive the counter opinion of said character in the opposite direction.

Just finished watching Hannibal, and you just got Cannibaled (not a real word) . So much better than a Psych class. Care for some Fromage?

Besides, how can you dislike the 90's prince of Emo, the guy is like Kurt Cobain meets Fabio. He has a silver harp and is not cheese at all.

"Hey I am going to play my Harp for you, the song is called emptiness, and I don't care if you like it or not. You all mean nothing to me, your souls could not possibly understand my true emptiness, an emptiness that only I am capable of achieving, none of you knows true sadness, I hate all of you, I hope you like my song, you won't believe it's not butter."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In response to Aeron Damphair a few threads ago:

Don't get me wrong, I agree with the R+L theory....but I also like being devil's advocate

It just bothers me that Jon is treated like shit by Catelyn, and Ned just stands there stoic as a statue, not speaking up.

At first, yah, I see the point of not telling... but after a 15 year marriage? all the potential fights between Cat/Ned or Cat/Jon that resulted from not telling the truth... Holding Jon's parentage from Cat just doesn't seem fair for Jon... or Ned for that matter

How long would it have taken for Ned to feel comfortable telling Cat? 5 years? 10 years? 15 years? How old is Jon Snow when Ned leaves Winterfell?

The fact is that the only way Ned knows the secret is safe is by taking it to his grave. He didn't even tell JON who his mother was. Why do people think he would have told Cat?

We can agree to disagree, but in no way is Ned not telling Cat anything like a legitimate problem with R+L=J

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cat is already mistrustful of Jon for presenting a hypothetical danger to her trueborn children. Telling her that he is an actual ticking bomb of real danger would make her fears even worse.

You said it better than I did! Thank you. There is also the fact that Cat has made repeated questionable judgements during the series, I mean yeah she was right not to trust Theon but when you count the number of blunders she made...come on!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In response to Aeron Damphair a few threads ago:

Don't get me wrong, I agree with the R+L theory....but I also like being devil's advocate

It just bothers me that Jon is treated like shit by Catelyn, and Ned just stands there stoic as a statue, not speaking up.

At first, yah, I see the point of not telling... but after a 15 year marriage? all the potential fights between Cat/Ned or Cat/Jon that resulted from not telling the truth... Holding Jon's parentage from Cat just doesn't seem fair for Jon... or Ned for that matter

Let's not forget that Ned committed high treason for hiding Jon's identity to Robert. My impression is that in not telling Cat, he was protecting her (and indirectly their children) as much as Jon.

I really don't focus on the secret, I think it's pretty well excepted. I actually am just curious about the facts surrounding it, I may actually be more interested in knowing if Rhaegar did have visions, his motivations, Lyanna's motivations, where she was taken etc...

:agree: Not to mention Jon's consequent 'drama trip' lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually you can hate a character in the book, while hate is often triggered by emotion, it more closely associated to disposition and attitude. Weather he is overrated or not is subjective to the individual reader, a natural conflict exists when one finds something different than another. It would suggest your dislike of the character stems from the fans and not the character. This can in turn be compounded by the fact that you are on a social site, most people will congregate to one idea or another and fall in line with certain beliefs in order to find acceptance, thus groups are formed, further compounding the problem as it is no longer an annoying individual but an entire group. The more people overrate the character the more likely it will drive the counter opinion of said character in the opposite direction.

I'd tend to agree insofar as its a pretty good definition of heresy (with a small h) where an opinion is judged not on the merits of the opposing arguments, but on how far the dissenting view diverges from orthodoxy. Since the fallacy of the opposing view is self evident from an orthodox viewpoint, then the heretic no matter what his arguments or his evidence must either be a fool or possessed by the Devil. :devil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think when Alys went from child-prisoner to married woman whose marriage sealed the alliance with the Thenn, she underwent a great transformation. That happened at the Wall.

That is not growing at the Wall. That is like what happened to the frog, when the princess kissed it. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd tend to agree insofar as its a pretty good definition of heresy (with a small h) where an opinion is judged not on the merits of the opposing arguments, but on how far the dissenting view diverges from orthodoxy. Since the fallacy of the opposing view is self evident from an orthodox viewpoint, then the heretic no matter what his arguments or his evidence must either be a fool or possessed by the Devil. :devil:

Heresy what an interesting idea. Though in some forms heresy is not so unorthodox as one might be led to believe but rather it seeks a natural balance with the conventional. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. When the heretic thoughts, ideas or beliefs are rejected from convention, the heretic in turn rejects convention. It would seem an opposing polarity exists, however the heretic still seeks acceptance for said heresy. Both conventional and unconventional ideas seek the same acceptance. Once Heresy attains acceptance can it be considered unconventional? Rather it would seem the two are one. Case and point R+L = J and Heresy (Big H),, though seemingly opposite they are in fact one, the Yin Yang concept is applied. The true balance between the two is not found in the idea or rejection of said idea, but rather the need for acceptance unite the two seemingly opposing sides. If R+L = J is the south face of the mountain and Heresy is the north face of the mountain, then acceptance is the sun that passes over the mountain in cycles.

Balance can be seen in the form of the crackpot posts. Both unconventional yet seeking acceptance while embracing rejection. A mountain will have things on it after all, trees, snow, caves, streams, birds etc... The choice has yet to be made on the crackpot it only seeks to exist and grow. But sometimes like in nature we hunt and destroy the crackpot, then we eat it, poop it out, and a month later it returns only to go through the same cycle hoping to find acceptance. This is the circle of life for the Forum of Ice and fire.

Feel free to rate this post on the Bullshit scale from 1-10, 11's will be accepted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heresy what an interesting idea. Though in some forms heresy is not so unorthodox as one might be led to believe but rather it seeks a natural balance with the conventional. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. When the heretic thoughts, ideas or beliefs are rejected from convention, the heretic in turn rejects convention. It would seem an opposing polarity exists, however the heretic still seeks acceptance for said heresy. Both conventional and unconventional ideas seek the same acceptance. Once Heresy attains acceptance can it be considered unconventional? Rather it would seem the two are one. Case and point R+L = J and Heresy (Big H),, though seemingly opposite they are in fact one, the Yin Yang concept is applied. The true balance between the two is not found in the idea or rejection of said idea, but rather the need for acceptance unite the two seemingly opposing sides. If R+L = J is the south face of the mountain and Heresy is the north face of the mountain, then acceptance is the sun that passes over the mountain in cycles.

Balance can be seen in the form of the crackpot posts. Both unconventional yet seeking acceptance while embracing rejection. A mountain will have things on it after all, trees, snow, caves, streams, birds etc... The choice has yet to be made on the crackpot it only seeks to exist and grow. But sometimes like in nature we hunt and destroy the crackpot, then we eat it, poop it out, and a month later it returns only to go through the same cycle hoping to find acceptance. This is the circle of life for the Forum of Ice and fire.

Feel free to rate this post on the Bullshit scale from 1-10, 11's will be accepted.

Bullshit usually baffles brains, but in general I'd agree.

In broad terms the R+L=J theory starts with the proposition that Jon is the first and foremost the son of Rhaegar Targaryen [Fire] while in equally broad terms we heretics hold it more important that he is the son of Lyanna Stark [ice] and interpret the evidence accordingly. In all probability neither of us is entirely right but as we speak on different wavelengths reaching a balance, nothwithstanding a certain degree of commonality, is very difficult, especially if as here there is a decided tendency to see it in terms of belief and heresy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bullshit usually baffles brains, but in general I'd agree.

In broad terms the R+L=J theory starts with the proposition that Jon is the first and foremost the son of Rhaegar Targaryen [Fire] while in equally broad terms we heretics hold it more important that he is the son of Lyanna Stark [ice] and interpret the evidence accordingly. In all probability neither of us is entirely right but as we speak on different wavelengths reaching a balance, nothwithstanding a certain degree of commonality, is very difficult, especially if as here there is a decided tendency to see it in terms of belief and heresy.

/checks the title of the thread/

Funny, I've always thought of him as the son of Rhaegar AND Lyanna

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bullshit usually baffles brains, but in general I'd agree.

In broad terms the R+L=J theory starts with the proposition that Jon is the first and foremost the son of Rhaegar Targaryen [Fire] while in equally broad terms we heretics hold it more important that he is the son of Lyanna Stark [ice] and interpret the evidence accordingly. In all probability neither of us is entirely right but as we speak on different wavelengths reaching a balance, nothwithstanding a certain degree of commonality, is very difficult, especially if as here there is a decided tendency to see it in terms of belief and heresy.

As someone who is a fairly regular contributor in the R+L=J thread, I'm baffled by this statement. Is there anyone here who agrees with what BC said? One of the main themes you see talked about on this thread is the balance that Jon represents, being the son of R&L. So, like I said, baffled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

/checks the title of the thread/

Funny, I've always thought of him as the son of Rhaegar AND Lyanna

Well he is but it's comparative aspects. Much the way you have said he is Snow, Stark, Targaryen. What I think is interesting about the whole Ice and Fire thing is people focus more on the blood than on the magic, and when doing aspects for Jon they tend to stop at Ice and Fire but relate 3 to him at the same time.

I would suggest and believe that it is more than Ice and Fire. I go back and argue for the song. The children are singers, their magic is tied to nature. Jon is a warg. That magic is in him it's part of him. The Others, the Children, the Dragons. I could understand that if it was just Ice and fire, but Martin put in the children, and they are magical. 3 Magics, 3 stars, 3 colors. And when those 3 lights combine them make a white light.

I believe it is the magic and not just the blood. If the magic was not important this would not be a fantasy novel but historical fiction, Martin would not use magic for no reason. He would not apply it to different races for no reason, and he would not put it in the title for no reason. He named the children singers for a reason.

Even in the title if you were substitute Nature for song the title still works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bullshit usually baffles brains, but in general I'd agree.

1 In broad terms the R+L=J theory starts with the proposition that Jon is the first and foremost the son of Rhaegar Targaryen [Fire] while in equally broad terms 2 we heretics hold it more important that he is the son of Lyanna Stark [ice]

1. A bizarre and unfounded claim.

2. Lots of people in 'Heresy' have differing opinions, and some don't even believe R+L=J at all. To represent your own take as a common heresy 'we', placing your idea as a supposed collective standard, is rather arrogant. The notion that Hersey both 'thinks outside the box' and acts as a hive-mind with yourself at the center, seems rather contradictory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. A bizarre and unfounded claim.

2. Lots of people in 'Heresy' have differing opinions, and some don't even believe R+L=J at all. To represent your own take as a common heresy 'we', placing your idea as a supposed collective standard, is rather arrogant. The notion that Hersey both 'thinks outside the box' and acts as a hive-mind with yourself at the center, seems rather contradictory.

I agree.

Not to mention that it's neither "respectful of the ideas of others" to dismiss RLJ as a single issue idea, as in this statement from a recent Heresy thread:

"Rather than concentrate on a single issue in relative isolation, as do worshippers at the Church of R+L=J..."

nor is it "good humoured" to make sweeping assumptions about the opinions of a vast swath of people and then follow up with dismissive comments about them.

Also, the above statements all betray a shocking lack of familiarity with the nature of the discussion that regulars in this thread routinely have. All of which is conducted "with reference to the text", something I've noticed is strangely lacking in "opposing viewpoints" where half of the "song" is routinely dismissed and the television series is routinely mined for "evidence"

Eta-- Ser C, I think you're right about the song. A song is something that transcends the sum of its parts, as is a relationship, a child, and Nature. (And probably lots of other things) I referenced this idea in a comment on the nature of synthesis earlier in this thread. Ironically, the last time BC came around roiling the waters ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree.

Not to mention that it's neither "respectful of the ideas of others" to dismiss RLJ as a single issue idea, as in this statement from a recent Heresy thread:

"Rather than concentrate on a single issue in relative isolation, as do worshippers at the Church of R+L=J..."

nor is it "good humoured" to make sweeping assumptions about the opinions of a vast swath of people and then follow up with dismissive comments about them.

Also, the above statements all betray a shocking lack of familiarity with the nature of the discussion that regulars in this thread routinely have. All of which is conducted "with reference to the text", something I've noticed is strangely lacking in "opposing viewpoints" where half of the "song" is routinely dismissed and the television series is routinely mined for "evidence"

Did BC say that?

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...