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

[J. Stargaryen]

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.

:rolleyes:

You still don't want to share your idea about how Ned knew that Lyanna is at the ToJ. After dropping that bomb, you just disappeared. Good provocation. :-)

That's all it was. Otherwise, why not share it?

[Yield.]

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.

I understand what you're saying about disrupting the narrative and if you recall I did say that if R+L=J turns out to not be true it would be a disappointment. And not because my theory of Jon's mother is different from yours and I would be proved wrong. The clues are there. I have read the books many times over and agree with you guys so I don't understand the why I am being painted into a corner that I am not fighting. I have no animosity towards any of you or your thread because I have not been on it ever to post anything or read through it. Only read the opening post and links therein once when I joined the boards and was happy that my supposition had company. I am not interested in saying I was right over and over. I prefer to explore other options.

What I am saying is that along with the strong hints and clues there are ambiguities in Martin's writing style that if he comes up with something spectacular to fill in the gaps that exist (and there are many things we don't know for sure) that there is still that possibility to having a different solution to who Jon's mother is. Not parents because the mystery is set up for us to try and figure out who mummy is. The astute reader realises that when the question is answered it opens up the question of who is dad is. Thus R+L=J is the strongest possibility out there. So I really don't understand how you can say that I am not keeping an open when all I am doing is keeping an open mind about both the narrative and the author's intent.

As to not being able to change the end of a story, that is not entirely true. Yes Martin has mapped things out and he has a clear end point to his tale, he doesn't want to change it based on what readers have figured out. However things do change whether anyone wants to admit it or not. An example of how things grow and change are well illustrated by Robin Hobb's books on the Farseer/Trader Bay/Fool stories. She writes in a style that leaves room for future possibilities that even she has not seen yet. However she is very similar to Martin in that the tales grow in the telling and as long as the clues planted in the beginning are not contradicted by the end then it's all good. The clues planted by Martin do leave enough room for different outcomes. Just because a clue is weaker than another doesn't make it a lie or wrong. It just means that we the readers have not given it enough of a chance. Lots of times in mysteries it's the smallest and most subtle of clues that are the true solution, not the ones that stand out. To me at least R+L=J came across quite strong and for that reason I question it.

[King Benjen II]

Care to elaborate?

I think Bran will reconnect with Jon possibly helping him survive or guiding him afterward and they both will be out for vengeance.

[Metopheles]

Yield.:

Don't forget the best example here : JKR

She always intended to have Harry + Hermione. not Ginny. She deeply regrets changing it.

Or Himym. People think they were betrayed by the end. But actually they weren't. It was clearly set up from the start that they both end up together. Their love was so strong and they need each other. But both are always driven by a thought that Ted needs to find the mother and that she will be his true love, the person who is a total mirror of himself, same as Robin with Barney.

And also about the lying thing. The creators blankly lied into the faces of fans that the mother would not die at the end. Yet she did. They wanted to keep the surprise, big deal. I loved it. I thank them for the ending and for the lie.

[wolfmaid7]

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).

Yeah i think this important,things look different from certain characters point of view depending on their biases.For many the relationship with Lya and Rhegar was this grand love affair and they wer uttelry in love with each other. I don't get that,i don't see the foundation for a relationship,plus some character memories don't match what is tangible.Then their ar all these peoples who are said to be soooo close to R and L yet,no thought of them meeting under the cherry tree every Sunday and somebody standing guard etc.Its just nothing no memory beyond what they might have believed based on their interpretation of why they did what they did.

Nope. Per GRRM:

I am aware of the principal Internet forums about A Song of Ice and Fire and I really used to look at the American and English groups. Nowadays, the most important site is Westeros, but I started to feel uncomfortable and I thought it would be a better idea not to get to these sides. The fans use to come up with theories; lots of them are just speculative but some of them are in the right way. Before the Internet, one reader could guess the ending you wanna do for your novel, but the other 10.000 wouldn’t know anything and they would be surprised. However, now, those 10.000 people use the Internet and read the right theories. They say: “Oh God, the butler did it!”, to use an example of a mystery novel. Then, you think: “I have to change the ending! The maiden would be the criminal!” To my mind that way is a disaster because if you are doing well you work, the books are full of clues that point to the butler doing it and help you to figure up the butler did it, but if you change the ending to point the maiden, the clues make no sense anymore; they are wrong or are lies, and I am not a liar.

Saying that Rhaegar was cremated when he was not would be a lie. Let me quote GRRM again:

I am not a liar.

I agree with a lot of what you are saying on paper,but i will go back to my Starwars per Obi Wan: I did not lie Darth Vader did kill Annakin Skywalker,your father-Paraphrasing.

I took it from over here, http://www.adriasnews.com/2012/10/george-r-r-martin-interview.html

I do not know whether this is the original source, but the quote is well kown and has been used and linked many times around the forums.

To me even seeing the words the connotation is ambiguos.

I understand what you're saying about disrupting the narrative and if you recall I did say that if R+L=J turns out to not be true it would be a disappointment. And not because my theory of Jon's mother is different from yours and I would be proved wrong. The clues are there. I have read the books many times over and agree with you guys so I don't understand the why I am being painted into a corner that I am not fighting. I have no animosity towards any of you or your thread because I have not been on it ever to post anything or read through it. Only read the opening post and links therein once when I joined the boards and was happy that my supposition had company. I am not interested in saying I was right over and over. I prefer to explore other options.

What I am saying is that along with the strong hints and clues there are ambiguities in Martin's writing style that if he comes up with something spectacular to fill in the gaps that exist (and there are many things we don't know for sure) that there is still that possibility to having a different solution to who Jon's mother is. Not parents because the mystery is set up for us to try and figure out who mummy is. The astute reader realises that when the question is answered it opens up the question of who is dad is. Thus R+L=J is the strongest possibility out there. So I really don't understand how you can say that I am not keeping an open when all I am doing is keeping an open mind about both the narrative and the author's intent.

As to not being able to change the end of a story, that is not entirely true. Yes Martin has mapped things out and he has a clear end point to his tale, he doesn't want to change it based on what readers have figured out. However things do change whether anyone wants to admit it or not. An example of how things grow and change are well illustrated by Robin Hobb's books on the Farseer/Trader Bay/Fool stories. She writes in a style that leaves room for future possibilities that even she has not seen yet. However she is very similar to Martin in that the tales grow in the telling and as long as the clues planted in the beginning are not contradicted by the end then it's all good. The clues planted by Martin do leave enough room for different outcomes. Just because a clue is weaker than another doesn't make it a lie or wrong. It just means that we the readers have not given it enough of a chance. Lots of times in mysteries it's the smallest and most subtle of clues that are the true solution, not the ones that stand out. To me at least R+L=J came across quite strong and for that reason I question it.

I agree :agree:

[Metopheles]

I like how the Obi Wan reference is used :D

I did not lie to you.....from a certain point of view.

Biggest douchebag in fantasy.....from a certain point of view.

And in Martin's works, everything is just true from a certain point of view. Prophecies.. I just love how "When the sun rises in the west and sets in the east" was considered as "na-ah, you never, ever, ever will be getting back together" but was actually a reference to Quentyn(the sun) to die in the east(essos)

[Metopheles]

Who the fuck is Jon Snow!?

[wolfmaid7]

Another question who creamated Rheagar? Who gave him the honor of a Targ funeral,was there anyone left to do that?See to his body respectfully and collect or keep his ashes.Furthermore,who secured his body?

[J. Stargaryen]

Yield.:

Don't forget the best example here : JKR

She always intended to have Harry + Hermione. not Ginny. She deeply regrets changing it.

I don't think this is correct.

Snippets of Rowling's interview with Emma Watson, who plays Hermione in the film versions of the bestselling Harry Potter books, were leaked last week, leaving fans in turmoil over the author's comments that she "wrote the Hermione-Ron relationship as a form of wish fulfilment", and that "for reasons that have very little to do with literature and far more to do with me clinging to the plot as I first imagined it, Hermione ended up with Ron".

- Link

Not that it really matters as JKR is JKR and GRRM is GRRM. Also, spoiler tags work like so: [ spoiler ] text [ /spoiler ] minus the spaces.

[Frey family reunion]

Here's my rule of thumb, if your theory gives me a headache reading through it, then I sincerely hope the theory is wrong, otherwise I've been wasting way too much of my time reading these books and debating people in these message boards.

[Metopheles]

I don't think this is correct.

- Link

Not that it really matters as JKR is JKR and GRRM is GRRM. Also, spoiler tags work like so: [ spoiler ] text [ /spoiler ] minus the spaces.

I know how the spoiler thing works, but I wrote the thing before I remembered I should use it.

An I read that JKR thing recently at Huffpost or Daily Telegraph or something

[Metopheles]

Another question who creamated Rheagar? Who gave him the honor of a Targ funeral,was there anyone left to do that?See to his body respectfully and collect or keep his ashes.Furthermore,who secured his body?

Was he mentioned during Joffrey's sightseeing tour with Marge ? He showed so many guys, why not the most important one?

And thinking back at the glamour thing.. Melisandre survived the strangler poison of Cressen, could(and you know I rather believe in the double theory) Rhaegar have survived the blow? Maybe he was knocked out for some time and looked dead, but was revived by his glamour again..

[Frey family reunion]

Was he mentioned during Joffrey's sightseeing tour with Marge ? He showed so many guys, why not the most important one?

And thinking back at the glamour thing.. Melisandre survived the strangler poison of Cressen, could(and you know I rather believe in the double theory) Rhaegar have survived the blow? Maybe he was knocked out for some time and looked dead, but was revived by his glamour again..

Well it is well known that in addition to his glamor, Rhaegar's magical rubies create a skin tight force field around his body, and the only place that he is at all vulnerable is in the heel, as long as the weapon is made primarily of mistletoe.

[Metopheles]

Who the fuck is Jon Snow!?

This is actually the new thread. I just wanted to use Locke's words for it. They fitted so well.

See you in another thread.

Let this one die.

[J. Stargaryen]

I know how the spoiler thing works, but I wrote the thing before I remembered I should use it.

An I read that JKR thing recently at Huffpost or Daily Telegraph or something

But you remembered to write "spoiler" in bold? Btw, do you know how the MultiQuote function works?

I'm not sure if you're trying to stick to your guns, but I provided a quote and link which contradicts what you stated. If you have a quote and link supporting your point I'd be happy to have a look.

[Modesty Lannister]

:rolleyes:

That's all it was. Otherwise, why not share it?

He said he knew how Ned kned where to find Lyanna. Many people asked him to share, but he never did. Why drop the bomb then?

[Modesty Lannister]

To me at least R+L=J came across quite strong and for that reason I question it.

Question away. That's why these forums are for. Many times (for example, the idea Benjen is CH, or Tyrion "the younger brother") when a clue is pointing to something, it probably isn't. But, sometimes they do. So, it's fun to debate until we know for sure.

[JNR]

That's all it was. Otherwise, why not share it?

Oh, the same reason I don't publish any of my theories.

I can't demonstrate it with 100% certainty, and would therefore have to spend weeks or months or years defending it, sometimes from people who think Ned isn't dead. This would get really tiresome.

I'll give you a clue, though.

Start with the idea of "they" who found Ned after Lyanna died and walk backwards in time, explaining how "they" got there, when, and why. You may find your answer.

[JNR]

He said he knew how Ned kned where to find Lyanna. Many people asked him to share, but he never did. Why drop the bomb then?

Honestly, I'm surprised anybody could consider that a "bomb." There are much more complex mysteries in this series than how Ned found Lyanna.

[Modesty Lannister]

Another question who creamated Rheagar? Who gave him the honor of a Targ funeral,was there anyone left to do that?See to his body respectfully and collect or keep his ashes.Furthermore,who secured his body?

That's what I thought as well and pointed out several times on this forum. GRRM tells us what happened with bodies of each major character. Tywin is even lying in-state until everybody chokes. But, RT? Not a word. In forensics, when there is no body, the death cannot be confirmed. And as for GRRM saying RT was cremated, as I said couple of times before, he does not need to lie at all. If he has written a part in which RT is cremated, he is not lying at all. And that's what I suspect was the essence of his answer, because (and there is a full Q and full A in the beginning of this thread) GRRM never answered the original questions which was who found RT's body and where was it buried. Furthermore, all major characters in the book have their thoughts of RT more than a decade after The Trident. None of them, apart from king Robert, have anything bad to say about him - friend or foe. And they keep talking about the dead guy why? Because GRRM is bored or because it is important for the plot. Why would a dead guy be important for the plot? If you can answer that question, then you MAY convince me RT is dead. Then we see MR with his Targaryen coloured cloak, his songs and lore and Dornishman's wife, a wildling addressing his wildling wife "my lady", crossing the Wall to go to Winterfell when king Robert was there and remembers a bastard on the back bench, visiting Winterfell as a brother of the night's watch years before that and after a long journey instead of going to eat something or take a nap, he goes to the play with Robb and Jon, and the last thing maester Aemon wants to do in life is to hold his son. No, there is definitely no clue there. I'm imagining things.