The Curious Case of The Dragon Prince and The Winter Rose 4

[Modesty Lannister]

Fact: Jon was born 8-9 months before Dany, and she was born 9 months after Rhaella's flight from KL at the end of the Rebellion (per book and SSM)

Fact: Aegon was about one year old at the end of the Rebellion (per SSM)

Yet, someone claimed that Aegon = Jon.

Not on this thread and if so, I missed it. This thread is presupposing L+R=J.

[Metopheles]

I think even if Mance is not Rhae he would have thought about actively finding Bloodraven. He is bookish and prophecy stuff is his. So when he read about the LCs and stuff, he might have found Bloodraven interesting, especially the magic part.

Or, I don't know, isn't the three eyed crow something the wildlings know about ? I currently only remember it from the show, Osha mentioning it. so could we assume Mance (Or mance rhaegar) searched for the crow and found it to be a man, bloodraven?

And I think the cotf.. if Bloodraven would let him in, then the cotf would. And if Mance (or Rhaegar) are so much about prophecy and saving someone and white walkers etc... I think there would be a common enemy scenario.

[Ygrain]

Not on this thread and if so, I missed it. This thread is presupposing L+R=J.

Not in this thread, or any of its previous incarnations. I just posted an example of an invalid challenge in response to your claim that nothing is set in stone.

[Modesty Lannister]

Not in this thread, or any of its previous incarnations. I just posted an example of an invalid challenge in response to your claim that nothing is set in stone.

What is your point? I am being friendly.

[The Snowfyre Chorus]

Funny that I mention how R+L=Jer positions are misrepresented around here and, almost on cue, you misrepresent my position. :thumbsup:

Not at all. I am not your agent; I represent only my own positions. You are clearly capable of speaking for yourself, and we all trust you to do so.

IIRC, that comment was mine, originally accompanied by emoticon(s) as I sure wasn't serious.

As for challenges and disagreement not being welcome... a challenge is poised, and some pieces of it do not fit with the information presented in the books and/or SSMs. The discrepancy is pointed out, and the poster goes either a)aha, I didn't know, that's a game-changer, or b)I still think what I think and ignore what doesn't fit. It is the latter attitude that leads to all kinds of peculiar discussions.

I think you're right, Ygrain - it probably was your comment. Didn't mean to misattribute anything, but I was browsing from my phone at the time and couldn't figure out how to "quote" from the locked thread. That's a good summary of the dynamic over there. I saw a newcomer comment recently (after receiving some correction from a more veteran RLJer) that "[he] got schooled big time." And the response (again, I think it may have been yours, Ygrain) was something like "that's what we're here for." Not unfriendly, but perhaps not a bad illustration of the process you've described above. Fortunately, this particular user took his schooling well.

Not on this thread and if so, I missed it. This thread is presupposing L+R=J.

The MR=RT discussion may presuppose that, I suppose. But the "Curious Case" threads were intended to be free of that presupposition. As I understand it, that was essentially the rationale for the thread... to create a space for discussion of Lyanna and Rhaegar, without necessarily presupposing that particular theory.

What would you like to see discussed in future iterations?

We've tried "legitimacy" without getting much traction. Maybe we can better address the issue from the other side. How about taking a look at bastards, bastardy... and with respect to Jon in particular, the merits of bastardy for purposes of storytelling. There is much to explore there.

[Metopheles]

We've tried "legitimacy" without getting much traction. Maybe we can better address the issue from the other side. How about taking a look at bastards, bastardy... and with respect to Jon in particular, the merits of bastardy for purposes of storytelling. There is much to explore there.

Even if I for myself am sure of the M=R theory, Jon's legitimacy would not be a great matter anymore.

The reason: Free Folk

There are so many new people in the realm now that accept bastards as legitimate children that it would be bollocks not to accept Jon.

If the election came, this would not be a big matter. Jon has too many people behind him, who would fight for his claim by means of , they would simply not follow anyone else.

So I think it isn't necessary that Jon is either Mance's child, Rhaegar's child, bastard or trueborn, all that matters is that he impressed a whole people and they respect him and would follow him.

If it came down to M=R=correct, then we could assume that Rhaegar may have married Lyanna wildling-style. He stole her and got her with child.

[Ygrain]

What is your point? I am being friendly.

That some people (not implying yourself here as I hardly know you) think that any opinion is valid and that rejecting theories which contradict something that has been explicitely stated by the author somehow equals narrow-mindedness.

I think you're right, Ygrain - it probably was your comment. Didn't mean to misattribute anything, but I was browsing from my phone at the time and couldn't figure out how to "quote" from the locked thread. That's a good summary of the dynamic over there. I saw a newcomer comment recently (after receiving some correction from a more veteran RLJer) that "[he] got schooled big time." And the response (again, I think it may have been yours, Ygrain) was something like "that's what we're here for." Not unfriendly, but perhaps not a bad illustration of the process you've described above. Fortunately, this particular user took his schooling well.

I cannot find that particular comment now and recall it only vaguely, but IIRC, the poster asked about a whole lot of things, received a whole lot of information they hadn't known previously, and wasn't unhappy about it in the least. And, this is how I perceive the role of the pinned thread: to readily provide all the information that has been gathered. Some clues in the books are easily missed, some information is available only in the SSMs, some is derived from the slips of the show creators and actors. There used to be a lot of close textual analysis in the older threads and there will be again when TWOW is released.

[The Snowfyre Chorus]

In connection with that, "Kingship" would be another interesting topic. What is a "true king?" We see that phrase tossed around quite a bit in these books.

[Metopheles]

In connection with that, "Kingship" would be another interesting topic. What is a "true king?" We see that phrase tossed around quite a bit in these books.

I made a topic a month ago or so about an "ultimate king" kinda. Leviathan, I called it. Tough it stopped abruptly.

[Yield.]

Fact: Jon was born 8-9 months before Dany, and she was born 9 months after Rhaella's flight from KL at the end of the Rebellion (per book and SSM)

Fact: Aegon was about one year old at the end of the Rebellion (per SSM)

Yet, someone claimed that Aegon = Jon.

Forgive me Ygrain and any other R+L=Jers that are on here being angry that we have different ideas and wish to explore them. I have no 'beef' with any of you nor do I think that your theory is wrong. I in fact clocked the R+L=J on my first read back in 1997ish when I was introduced to these novels and each time I re-read them I find lots of evidence that it is most likely true.

That said I believe that you can not use SSMs as facts. As I said earlier in this thread what an author says about his characters, world and plot can not be taken as solid truths until the story is finished. That is just not the way the writing process works. What is true at the moment when the question is asked does not always remain true once the story is being written. Writing is a fascinating process and a struggle between what you want or think will happen in your world (read story) and what the characters actually do. Martin himself has more than once admitted this to be true. Look at all the bollix that happen in the Meerenese Knot. He never planned that. It just happened and he had to find a way around it.

Martin has also left a lot of things open to interpretation. That is his style and it serves him well. He leaves himself enough wiggle room to change things. Would Jon being Neds bastard be a let down? Yes I think so. But Martin could do that because there is enough ambiguity in his work to allow it. The key is to keep an open mind.

[Yield.]

We've tried "legitimacy" without getting much traction. Maybe we can better address the issue from the other side. How about taking a look at bastards, bastardy... and with respect to Jon in particular, the merits of bastardy for purposes of storytelling. There is much to explore there.

I second this...if it's a case of voting ;)

[Ygrain]

Forgive me Ygrain and any other R+L=Jers that are on here being angry that we have different ideas and wish to explore them. I have no 'beef' with any of you nor do I think that your theory is wrong. I in fact clocked the R+L=J on my first read back in 1997ish when I was introduced to these novels and each time I re-read them I find lots of evidence that it is most likely true.

That said I believe that you can not use SSMs as facts. As I said earlier in this thread what an author says about his characters, world and plot can not be taken as solid truths until the story is finished. That is just not the way the writing process works. What is true at the moment when the question is asked does not always remain true once the story is being written. Writing is a fascinating process and a struggle between what you want or think will happen in your world (read story) and what the characters actually do. Martin himself has more than once admitted this to be true. Look at all the bollix that happen in the Meerenese Knot. He never planned that. It just happened and he had to find a way around it.

Martin has also left a lot of things open to interpretation. That is his style and it serves him well. He leaves himself enough wiggle room to change things. Would Jon being Neds bastard be a let down? Yes I think so. But Martin could do that because there is enough ambiguity in his work to allow it. The key is to keep an open mind.

Sorry but this is true only to an extent. Somewhere, GRRM compared writing to taking a long trip when you know where you start from and what your destination is, but the details of the journey can change along the way and cannot be all planned ahead. The mystery of Jon's parentage was established in the very beginning and it is tied to the events taking place prior the current storyline. Gradually revealing them is something that has to be pre-planned, and once the clues are planted, the outcome cannot be changed without disrupting the narrative (if you want to see what changing the outcome half-way through the story causes, take a look at the Mass Effect series). Plus, it is something that GRRM expressly said he wouldn't do.

If you have to disregard the word of the author in order to pull a new theory, that's not keeping an open mind but making up AU fanfiction. I don't share GRRM's dislike of the genre, so I don't have a problem with that, as long as the acts of creating stuff and analysing what has been written are kept separate. You like the former, fine, I prefer the latter. And the reason why "we" are here is not being angered by your fun but by certain generalising attitudes which tend to paint us in a negative light.

[Metopheles]

If you have to disregard the word of the author in order to pull a new theory, that's not keeping an open mind but making up AU fanfiction.

Well thank you.

[The Great Cornholio!]

A couple of things...

1. I'm not sure if M=R, but I'm 100% sure Mance is more than meets the eye. The general picture of the Brothers of the Knights Watch is that they are not affluent individuals (with the exception of the high born). Mance is as low born as it gets is continuously performing beyond his stated means.

2. The Red Witch was very willing to burn anyone with Kings Blood, so why protect Mance? There is a significance to him that has not been revealed yet.

3. Where are people getting the impression that the Children of the Forest are evil? The impression I got was that they were old, unique, and mysterious. Not evil. If they were in league with the WW they wouldn't need wards to protect them from Wights.

Sorry but this is true only to an extent. Somewhere, GRRM compared writing to taking a long trip when you know where you start from and what your destination is, but the details of the journey can change along the way and cannot be all planned ahead. The mystery of Jon's parentage was established in the very beginning and it is tied to the events taking place prior the current storyline. Gradually revealing them is something that has to be pre-planned, and once the clues are planted, the outcome cannot be changed without disrupting the narrative (if you want to see what changing the outcome half-way through the story causes, take a look at the Mass Effect series). Plus, it is something that GRRM expressly said he wouldn't do.

If you have to disregard the word of the author in order to pull a new theory, that's not keeping an open mind but making up AU fanfiction. I don't share GRRM's dislike of the genre, so I don't have a problem with that, as long as the acts of creating stuff and analysing what has been written are kept separate. You like the former, fine, I prefer the latter. And the reason why "we" are here is not being angered by your fun but by certain generalising attitudes which tend to paint us in a negative light.

4. Agree. Theres no point to hid such a big mystery 3/4 through the series if it wasn't important. I mean super important. Anything less would be purposeless. GRRM has even toyed with the reader regarding Jon's parentage.

[JNR]

That said I believe that you can not use SSMs as facts. As I said earlier in this thread what an author says about his characters, world and plot can not be taken as solid truths until the story is finished. That is just not the way the writing process works.

It's an interesting point. GRRM has certainly, on various occasions, stated there would be a five-year gap between the events of books three and four, and that the series would be six books long.

Well, we now know those statements all to have been complete BS.

Instead of skipping those years, he's apparently writing them out, and he's nowhere close to finishing the five years, either. The total change in the series that emerges as a result, compared to GRRM's original desgin, is not small. We are getting more than two books full of huge developments that GRRM never intended to write at all!

That said, I agree with the essence of Ygrain's position. I think GRRM has always known where he's taking this series; I think the mystery of Jon's parents was painstakingly crafted in advance; and I don't think he's changed it since that time. I think he's been developing it carefully ever since. I would go further and say that by and large, I think he isn't going to change the huge body of detailed information you find in SSMs, in the vast majority of cases.

But the problem with R+L=J remains: the constant assertion that it is correct, "basically canon," and therefore that no other theory can possibly be correct.

Any time any poster claims any theory to be 100% likely -- that there is 0% chance of it being wrong -- that poster is in deep, deep logical trouble.

This is particularly true in a case like this, where it's not possible to show (and in fact, hasn't been shown) that the purported parents were even on the same continent at the time of the child's conception, or ever had a conversation, or were ever alone in a room together, etc etc.

I cannot, offhand, think of a case in which a scientist has said the probability of evolutionary theory (as established as that is!) is 100%, or the theory of the Big Bang, etc. Scientists know better than to make such assertions.

[Hrafntýr]

I don't know about anyone else, but I am a newcomer and I do welcome all challenges. Nothing is set in stone.

Okay, but one might be more selective about tarring all who raise counterarguments to MR=RT with the same brush. It's not the case that "everyone" keeps bringing up "the quote" nor that everyone fails to provide textual support or detailed arguments regarding specific passages of the text. It's a little immodest, don't you think, to imply that critics have not read or interpreted such passages with as much sophistication as proponents? I've seen some very substantive critiques raised in this thread, with textual support provided, and really fine reasoning.

Fact: Jon was born 8-9 months before Dany, and she was born 9 months after Rhaella's flight from KL at the end of the Rebellion (per book and SSM)

Fact: Aegon was about one year old at the end of the Rebellion (per SSM)

Yet, someone claimed that Aegon = Jon.

That some people (not implying yourself here as I hardly know you) think that any opinion is valid and that rejecting theories which contradict something that has been explicitely stated by the author somehow equals narrow-mindedness.

Ha ha, I think that point actually may have been raised in this topic, but rather as "Aegon"=Jon. Which could be supported, despite the SSM "facts," given that we as readers are supposed to question whether Aegon="Aegon". Of course there are other grounds to reject this, namely Jon's obvious Stark looks. But then I don't really know what the argument about Aegon=Jon was!

As for future iterations of the thread: I had suggested above assembling "who might know what about R+L." It would mean reconstructing sets of relationships and timelines for the time from Harrenhal to the ToJ. I realized how interesting this might be when wolfmaid wondered whether JonCon might know something. Just think about what we'd investigate to answer this question: JC's timeline (when, exactly, is he made Hand, and where was he before? When does he go to the field, and what exactly does he do after his defeat at the Battle of the Bells? And just how close was he to Rhaegar anyway?....). There's the members of the KG, there's whoever Lyanna might have been with at the time of her "abduction." Seems interesting to me, but legitimacy could also be interesting, though we've covered a lot of that ground before.

[Metopheles]

I cannot, offhand, think of a case in which a scientist has said the probability of evolutionary theory (as established as that is!) is 100%, or the theory of the Big Bang, etc. Scientists know better than to make such assertions.

I think you are right that in a work of fiction there can anything happen. And a theory can be true in all books, but the author decides to say fuck you and write another book giving evidence that it is not true. he is basically god. He can do what he wants.

But evolutionary theory ? C'mon. You cannot disprove this one. There is no way of it being wrong. Not a chance. Sure there are some things not 100% cleared, but the thing is that it is true. It's something like gravity and 1+1=2. It's a law of nature and cannot be "believed". It has to be accepted.

What could happen with the "accepted theories" is that 9*6=42 is at some point made false by the author and only used as a device and even if fans point out that in fact 9*6 is 42, the author could still say no. Even if it is true.

But the "cremation quote" is for me just an example of evasion and "I didn't buy you the big lego packet" but at christmas eve it is still under the tree. Make kids think it will not be there, so they are more happy when it is.

And he also said he would do fewer interviews, and I can imagine it is also to avoid critical questions that, when answered with the truth, would destroy major plot twists.

[JNR]

As for future iterations of the thread: I had suggested above assembling "who might know what about R+L." It would mean reconstructing sets of relationships and timelines for the time from Harrenhal to the ToJ. I realized how interesting this might be when wolfmaid wondered whether JonCon might know something. Just think about what we'd investigate to answer this question: JC's timeline (when, exactly, is he made Hand, and where was he before? When does he go to the field, and what exactly does he do after his defeat at the Battle of the Bells? And just how close was he to Rhaegar anyway?....). There's the members of the KG, there's whoever Lyanna might have been with at the time of her "abduction."

Great idea.

I'd enjoy reading such a thread; it would demonstrate how painstaking GRRM has been, in introducing things like character bias/preconceptions/limited knowledge, all of which tend to lead to unreliable narration... or of readers deciding that X means Y (when that's not exactly a sound conclusion).

[Modesty Lannister]

Sorry but this is true only to an extent. Somewhere, GRRM compared writing to taking a long trip when you know where you start from and what your destination is, but the details of the journey can change along the way and cannot be all planned ahead. The mystery of Jon's parentage was established in the very beginning and it is tied to the events taking place prior the current storyline. Gradually revealing them is something that has to be pre-planned, and once the clues are planted, the outcome cannot be changed without disrupting the narrative (if you want to see what changing the outcome half-way through the story causes, take a look at the Mass Effect series). Plus, it is something that GRRM expressly said he wouldn't do.

If you have to disregard the word of the author in order to pull a new theory, that's not keeping an open mind but making up AU fanfiction. I don't share GRRM's dislike of the genre, so I don't have a problem with that, as long as the acts of creating stuff and analysing what has been written are kept separate. You like the former, fine, I prefer the latter. And the reason why "we" are here is not being angered by your fun but by certain generalising attitudes which tend to paint us in a negative light.

Ah, I finally get your point. You reject RT=MR in general.

[JNR]

But evolutionary theory ? C'mon. You cannot disprove this one. There is no way of it being wrong. Not a chance. Sure there are some things not 100% cleared, but the thing is that it is true. It's something like gravity and 1+1=2. It's a law of nature and cannot be "believed". It has to be accepted.

This is a great way to make my point.

I am actually a champion of science, and absolutely do believe evolutionary theory is correct (and so do the huge majority of the world's scientists).

But my point is that they know better than to throw around 100% probabilities.

See, the history of science is such that even the most well-established, seemingly-irrefutable ideas -- "laws" -- have been overturned.

Example: the law of conservation of parity, believed beyond doubt... until 1957, when it was shown as false. T. D. Lee got his Nobel prize for that.

Such examples are exactly why you won't find any reputable scientist assigning a 100% probability to even something as sound and accepted as evolutionary theory.

But the "cremation quote" is for me just an example of evasion and "I didn't buy you the big lego packet" but at christmas eve it is still under the tree.

It's possible.

I myself interpret it like this: "Cremation doesn't just mean put in a fire, but reduced to ashes... so GRRM is saying Rhaegar was reduced to ashes." If this is what he meant, it's hard to see how Rhaegar can also be Mance.

But I wouldn't claim the probability is 100% that I am right, either. GRRM is just too tricky a bird for any such claim.