Jon Icefyre Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Should this be reported as a trolling post? Let's wait a bit and see if he gives us a reasonable explanation lol...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IceFire125 Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 :agree: I don't think GRRM has anything against the hero's journey in most myths/fantasies. Contrary to what some believe, I don't think GRRM is out to destroy that. Jon exhibits all the signs of the hidden prince, chosen one, reluctant hero story lines from myths. For GRRM, it's all about how the hero finds his true self/identity, the conflicts within him as opposed to achieving greatness instantly. Yes, and Jon is far from perfect, he has flaws and weakness and desires, like all men do. He yearns to be legitimate, to not live a hard life as a bastard, to take the name Lord Stark of Winterfell and take Val as wife, to grow old with their kids and with Sam and Gilly and her kid, raising them together. But once he looked at Ghost, that mark symbol of the old gods (the white tree with red eyes like blood), Jon cast away those desires without a second a thought, because he knew the heart tree in Winterfell would be cut down and burned should he chooses to go for his yearnings. Yet, unknown to Jon, the hard life--the world had already chosen his path for him, for a much greater purpose, a much greater task in the world... Tyrion felt sorry for the boy. He had chosen a hard life … or perhaps he should say that a hard life had been chosen for him. ...like his Father, Rhaegar, before him... “Prince Rhaegar’s prowess was unquestioned, but he seldom entered the lists. He never loved the song of swords the way that Robert did, or Jaime Lannister. It was something he had to do, a task the world had set him. He did it well, for he did everything well..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingmonkey Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Newbie on these boards, so apologies if I missed anything (89 threads? Ye gods.) R+L=J makes sense. It's neat, it explains things. I like it. I'm almost a believer, except... How would you explain R+L=J to someone who has no knowledge of GoT/ASoIaF at all? "Well basically there's this ugly duckling who turns out to be a handsome prince. He thinks he's a bastard son of a remote noble house with no future, but it turns out he's secretly the rightful king of everything". My biggest problem with R+L=J is this. The thread FAQs talk about the obviousness issue; yes, it's not obvious to every reader, but I can't help thinking it would be rather obvious to GRRM, who seems to get great pleasure in confounding clichés. It's tough to see how x+L=J can't be right. The timing and the bed of blood is just too strong a pointer (unless it's a MASSIVE red herring). So can x be someone other than R? While I do agree R+L is the best fit for the evidence, I have three ideas in my head that I've seen either barely discussed or not discussed at all. As they're heretical and in two cases at the very least borderline crackpottery, is this the right place to bring them up? Would they be better in a heresy thread? Or a "[Crackpottery] ?+L=J" thread all of their own? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnmaskedLurker Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Newbie on these boards, so apologies if I missed anything (89 threads? Ye gods.) R+L=J makes sense. It's neat, it explains things. I like it. I'm almost a believer, except... How would you explain R+L=J to someone who has no knowledge of GoT/ASoIaF at all? "Well basically there's this ugly duckling who turns out to be a handsome prince. He thinks he's a bastard son of a remote noble house with no future, but it turns out he's secretly the rightful king of everything". My biggest problem with R+L=J is this. The thread FAQs talk about the obviousness issue; yes, it's not obvious to every reader, but I can't help thinking it would be rather obvious to GRRM, who seems to get great pleasure in confounding clichés. It's tough to see how x+L=J can't be right. The timing and the bed of blood is just too strong a pointer (unless it's a MASSIVE red herring). So can x be someone other than R? While I do agree R+L is the best fit for the evidence, I have three ideas in my head that I've seen either barely discussed or not discussed at all. As they're heretical and in two cases at the very least borderline crackpottery, is this the right place to bring them up? Would they be better in a heresy thread? Or a "[Crackpottery] ?+L=J" thread all of their own? Such a result would be totally out of left field. It is clear to the reader that R and L were together in ToJ. So if someone else is the father--who? One the KG, Dayne or Whent? Now that would be a twist, but really pointless. This scrambling for alternatives happens when people spend 20 years asking the same question. I don't think GRRM is as opposed to cliches as you suggest. He will put a unique twist on the cliche, but cliches work for a reason--they satisfy an emotional trigger in people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Leftwich Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Newbie on these boards, so apologies if I missed anything (89 threads? Ye gods.) R+L=J makes sense. It's neat, it explains things. I like it. I'm almost a believer, except... How would you explain R+L=J to someone who has no knowledge of GoT/ASoIaF at all? Why would you be explaining it to someone who has no knowledge of them? With no context it would be pointless. Parallel it with Gandalf coming alive again... how would that be explained... it is pointless to explain. (Like that person that comes in at the middle of movie and starts asking endless, pointless questions.) The 'obvious' test depends on someone actually having had read the books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alia of the knife Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 89 versions of this theory....Can I pass out now? :bs: :rolleyes: No, you have a long way to go before your watch is done. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingmonkey Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Why would you be explaining it to someone who has no knowledge of them? It's an exercise in avoiding preconceptions. We've read the books, watched the TV show, thought about it all. As a result, we are inevitably somewhat blinded to the simple underlying structure, because we're so focused on the detail. When you present R+L=J in the simplest possible terms, it does sound like a very clichéd -- dare I say it even cheesy -- plot twist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alia of the knife Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 It's an exercise in avoiding preconceptions. We've read the books, watched the TV show, thought about it all. As a result, we are inevitably somewhat blinded to the simple underlying structure, because we're so focused on the detail. When you present R+L=J in the simplest possible terms, it does sound like a very clichéd -- dare I say it even cheesy -- plot twist. But why is something often "cliche?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Stargaryen Posted July 19, 2014 Author Share Posted July 19, 2014 Newbie on these boards, so apologies if I missed anything (89 threads? Ye gods.) R+L=J makes sense. It's neat, it explains things. I like it. I'm almost a believer, except... How would you explain R+L=J to someone who has no knowledge of GoT/ASoIaF at all? "Well basically there's this ugly duckling who turns out to be a handsome prince. He thinks he's a bastard son of a remote noble house with no future, but it turns out he's secretly the rightful king of everything". My biggest problem with R+L=J is this. The thread FAQs talk about the obviousness issue; yes, it's not obvious to every reader, but I can't help thinking it would be rather obvious to GRRM, who seems to get great pleasure in confounding clichés. It's tough to see how x+L=J can't be right. The timing and the bed of blood is just too strong a pointer (unless it's a MASSIVE red herring). So can x be someone other than R? While I do agree R+L is the best fit for the evidence, I have three ideas in my head that I've seen either barely discussed or not discussed at all. As they're heretical and in two cases at the very least borderline crackpottery, is this the right place to bring them up? Would they be better in a heresy thread? Or a "[Crackpottery] ?+L=J" thread all of their own? Welcome to the forums! :cheers: This is the best place to present your alternatives, if you're looking for answers. This thread is frequented by several individuals who really know the ins and outs of Jon's parentage. However, people who are looking for validation of their pet non-RLJ theory aren't always receptive to the responses they receive here. That said, it's really R+L=J. If you've already arrived at Lyanna as Jon's mother because of the "bed of blood" at the ToJ, then you've already made the connection to Rhaegar, even if you don't realize it yet. Along with Lyanna's "bed of blood," Ned also thinks about (blue) roses at the ToJ; e.g., in a room that smelled of blood and roses. - AGoT, Eddard I. Chronologically, Lyanna's first appearance with (blue) roses was when Rhaegar named her the QoLaB at the Harrenhal tourney, and placed the crown of winter roses in her lap. So, all of the (blue) roses that Lyanna is associated with came from Rhaegar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearQueen87 Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 It's an exercise in avoiding preconceptions. We've read the books, watched the TV show, thought about it all. As a result, we are inevitably somewhat blinded to the simple underlying structure, because we're so focused on the detail. When you present R+L=J in the simplest possible terms, it does sound like a very clichéd -- dare I say it even cheesy -- plot twist. I don't agree. The Unsullied reaction to Sean Bean's interview in which he said, "I'm clearly not Jon Snow's father" seems to suggest that the Unsullied are going to have their minds blown by R and L. It's not cliche in that everyone has already guessed. It's a very subtle mystery that takes many people years to piece together. I piece it together alone over several re-reads, but until I came here, I hadn't thought of half the stuff that gets pointed out to me now by others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon_Samwell_Snow Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Don't report me. I was surprised about this thread. I am no troll. I like this theory. It is the closest one to Jon's parentage. G.R.R.M has thought about this long and hard. He will make sure that we will keep guessing. Let's take a look at the Tourney of Harrenhal and its timeline. Robert's Rebellion lasted for nearly a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearQueen87 Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Don't report me. I was surprised about this thread. I am no troll. I like this theory. It is the closest one to Jon's parentage. G.R.R.M has thought about this long and hard. He will make sure that we will keep guessing. Let's take a look at the Tourney of Harrenhal and its timeline. Robert's Rebellion lasted for nearly a year. Is there something in the timeline that you have a specific question about? And apart from any new evidence that leads away from R and L in WOW, what do you mean by keep guessing. I think WOW is actually going to give us a confirmation; Jon might get it confirmed too but we definitely will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Leftwich Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 It's an exercise in avoiding preconceptions. We've read the books, watched the TV show, thought about it all. As a result, we are inevitably somewhat blinded to the simple underlying structure, because we're so focused on the detail. When you present R+L=J in the simplest possible terms, it does sound like a very clichéd -- dare I say it even cheesy -- plot twist. Anything explained in the simplest terms would be cliched/cheesy. The presentation is everything, especially the why/motivation behind it. GRRM is all about that. At first, Jaime is a jerk who murdered his king. But then we learn why he did it. That the king own close guard killed him is cliched. But the why adds the depth to the story. That R+L=J is not a big deal. The why, that we have not learned yet, is the real meat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon_Samwell_Snow Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Is there something in the timeline that you have a specific question about? And apart from any new evidence that leads away from R and L in WOW, what do you mean by keep guessing. I think WOW is actually going to give us a confirmation; Jon might get it confirmed too but we definitely will.He will keep us guessing in our shoes. There is a lot of clues in the books about this theory. I am hoping that WOW will not lead us away from this theory. Jon's vision.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stateofdissipation Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Newbie on these boards, so apologies if I missed anything (89 threads? Ye gods.) R+L=J makes sense. It's neat, it explains things. I like it. I'm almost a believer, except... How would you explain R+L=J to someone who has no knowledge of GoT/ASoIaF at all? "Well basically there's this ugly duckling who turns out to be a handsome prince. He thinks he's a bastard son of a remote noble house with no future, but it turns out he's secretly the rightful king of everything". My biggest problem with R+L=J is this. The thread FAQs talk about the obviousness issue; yes, it's not obvious to every reader, but I can't help thinking it would be rather obvious to GRRM, who seems to get great pleasure in confounding clichés. It's tough to see how x+L=J can't be right. The timing and the bed of blood is just too strong a pointer (unless it's a MASSIVE red herring). So can x be someone other than R? While I do agree R+L is the best fit for the evidence, I have three ideas in my head that I've seen either barely discussed or not discussed at all. As they're heretical and in two cases at the very least borderline crackpottery, is this the right place to bring them up? Would they be better in a heresy thread? Or a "[Crackpottery] ?+L=J" thread all of their own? How would you explain R+L=J to someone who has no knowledge of GoT/ASoIaF at all? Ned--all around good guy-- has a kid that he has raised as his bastard. Only, Ned never refer to or thinks of Jon as his son. As the story goes on you find out Ned made a promise to his sister lady Lyanna as she was dying. He thinks about what he paid and is paying to keep that promise. In the middle of the book, Ned dreams of his fight against some guys to rescue his sister and of his sister in her bed of blood. Then Ned dies. Then in like chapter 61 we find out that "bed of blood" is childbirth. Ned raised his sister's kid and Nobody knows about it. The kid still thinks he is a bastard, and basically went off and joined the army. He is really the son of a prince and a lady, that was raised by his uncle as a nobody. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearQueen87 Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 How would you explain R+L=J to someone who has no knowledge of GoT/ASoIaF at all? Ned--all around good guy-- has a kid that he has raised as his bastard. Only, Ned never refer to or thinks of Jon as his son. As the story goes on you find out Ned made a promise to his sister lady Lyanna as she was dying. He thinks about what he paid and is paying to keep that promise. In the middle of the book, Ned dreams of his fight against some guys to rescue his sister and of his sister in her bed of blood. Then Ned dies. Then in like chapter 61 we find out that "bed of blood" is childbirth. Ned raised his sister's kid and Nobody knows about it. The kid still thinks he is a bastard, and basically went off and joined the army. He is really the son of a prince and a lady, that was raised by his uncle as a nobody. Well. There we go. :cheers: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellfoy Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Newbie on these boards, so apologies if I missed anything (89 threads? Ye gods.) R+L=J makes sense. It's neat, it explains things. I like it. I'm almost a believer, except... How would you explain R+L=J to someone who has no knowledge of GoT/ASoIaF at all? "Well basically there's this ugly duckling who turns out to be a handsome prince. He thinks he's a bastard son of a remote noble house with no future, but it turns out he's secretly the rightful king of everything". My biggest problem with R+L=J is this. The thread FAQs talk about the obviousness issue; yes, it's not obvious to every reader, but I can't help thinking it would be rather obvious to GRRM, who seems to get great pleasure in confounding clichés. It's tough to see how x+L=J can't be right. The timing and the bed of blood is just too strong a pointer (unless it's a MASSIVE red herring). So can x be someone other than R? While I do agree R+L is the best fit for the evidence, I have three ideas in my head that I've seen either barely discussed or not discussed at all. As they're heretical and in two cases at the very least borderline crackpottery, is this the right place to bring them up? Would they be better in a heresy thread? Or a "[Crackpottery] ?+L=J" thread all of their own? Because you put it with cheesy words. Even if you want it to be simple, you have to adapt to the style of the real story. You should talk about Ned's conflicts (raising Jon is high treason, Catlyn and all), talk of the consequences of the love story of the fair lady and her prince (started a chain of events that leaded to a rebellion, thousands of dead, dynasty overthrown, silver prince dead, mother dead, others children of silver prince slaughtered) and mention the very fact that teh not-so-bastard joined an order for life because he thought he was a nobody and can not marry, nor have children, nor take the damn throne anymore. See ? Not so clichéd anymore... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon_Samwell_Snow Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Ned was a honorable man. He had good to his name. Always kept his word too. "Promise me, Ned." was the last thing his sister said to him before she passed on. Was this about Jon or something else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stateofdissipation Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Don't report me. I was surprised about this thread. I am no troll. I like this theory. It is the closest one to Jon's parentage. G.R.R.M has thought about this long and hard. He will make sure that we will keep guessing. Let's take a look at the Tourney of Harrenhal and its timeline. Robert's Rebellion lasted for nearly a year. The reason I am never specific about dates and distances is precisely so that people won't sit down and do this sort of thing.My suggestion would be to put away the ruler and the stopwatch, and just enjoy the story.--GRRMhttp://www.westeros....y_and_Distances we can try... but how far do you really think we can go... I just finished an exhaustive timeline between the Trident and the ToJ..in conclusion my dates were valid within 2 months or thereabouts... give or take 37 days... and we have more on that than we do on Harrenhal.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stateofdissipation Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Sorry to go back to the previous closed topic, but I just wanted to reply to something BearQueen87 wrote to me in the last one: Me: BearQueen87: ...and I thought that was kind of funny. Because the Jon-is-Absolutely-King! Theory requires the assumption that the Kingsguard at the Tower ARE making up their own orders. Think about it. The three KG at the ToJ initially stayed there guarding the Tower because Rhaegar (who was never king) ordered them to stay there guarding Lyanna from all comers. But if you believe Jon is the King and the KG are guarding him, then WHO gave them the order to attack Ned without attempting to parley first (which is a perfectly sensible military option when approached by an enemy willing to talk, and doesn't rule out battle if the enemy turns out not to be amenable to your terms)? Jon is not capable of giving that order, or any order; he's a baby. Lyanna would NEVER give the order to the KG telling them to do their best to kill Ned. Ergo, either the KG were acting on Rhaegar's orders (which are now obsolete and endangering to Jon under the current circumstances) OR they were making up their own orders (since no one in the tower could or would give them the order to kill Ned). And since you have just supplied the Word of God that the KG can't make up their own orders, then you leave me with only one option: the KG are obeying their last orders from Rhaegar to defend the Tower from all comers - even though those orders currently endanger Jon more than trying to parley with Ned. And if the KG are more interested in following their last orders from a dead Crown Prince to the letter than doing what is more conducive to Jon's survival - then I think it's just more likely to believe they don't think Jon's the King. Just in my opinion. It is a pretty solidly stated opinion.. and supportable.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.