Jump to content

R+L =J v.105

Jon Weirgaryen

By Jon Weirgaryen,
in General (ASoIaF)

Recommended Posts

Kingmonkey Council Member

Kingmonkey

Posted
Posted

Do you think Jon is the "song of ice and fire" because of his Stark and Targaryan blood?

Do you think Jon's 'ice' (Stark) blood could keep him from being AAR?

I'm honestly curious what people will say.

Note that when we get "He is the prince that was promised, and his is the song of ice and fire", we are given his is the song, not he is the song. I'd say that makes it clear that the 'song' is a story, not a person.

Oral storytelling is often in the form of a poem or song, cf. chanson de geste (song of deeds), The Song of Roland, etc. Thus, when people in Westeros look back on the events of the books, they will talk about them as the Song of Fire and Ice. The key events of the song relate to fire (dragons, Targaryens, wildfire) and ice (others, the wall, Starks), and the ways in which fire and ice interact to make the song. The events of the Song are precipitated by a union of fire and ice through Rhaegar and Lyanna. Jon may be central to the story, but it's not a story of ice and fire purely because of R+L=J, it's a series of important events brought about by both the union and the antagonism of opposites.

I'm rather agnostic on whether Jon (or indeed anyone else) will be actually be AAR / PTWP. I'm not sure there necessarily has to be any clear and unambiguous filling of these (this?) roles by a particular individual rather than association after the fact, and the various consequences of people who believe that prophecy must necessarily come to pass trying to shape events to fit those prophecies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BearQueen87 Council Member

BearQueen87

Posted
Posted

Note that when we get "He is the prince that was promised, and his is the song of ice and fire", we are given his is the song, not he is the song. I'd say that makes it clear that the 'song' is a story, not a person.

Oral storytelling is often in the form of a poem or song, cf. chanson de geste (song of deeds), The Song of Roland, etc. Thus, when people in Westeros look back on the events of the books, they will talk about them as the Song of Fire and Ice. The key events of the song relate to fire (dragons, Targaryens, wildfire) and ice (others, the wall, Starks), and the ways in which fire and ice interact to make the song. The events of the Song are precipitated by a union of fire and ice through Rhaegar and Lyanna. Jon may be central to the story, but it's not a story of ice and fire purely because of R+L=J, it's a series of important events brought about by both the union and the antagonism of opposites.

I'm rather agnostic on whether Jon (or indeed anyone else) will be actually be AAR / PTWP. I'm not sure there necessarily has to be any clear and unambiguous filling of these (this?) roles by a particular individual rather than association after the fact, and the various consequences of people who believe that prophecy must necessarily come to pass trying to shape events to fit those prophecies.

I think the song of ice and fire refers to a great many things. A battle, Others and Dragons, and Jon himself. Rhaegar, IMO, is saying that there is something about this song that is reflective in a certain individual. And that's Jon as the son(g) of ice and fire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sj4iy Council Member

sj4iy

Posted
Posted

I think the song of ice and fire refers to a great many things. A battle, Others and Dragons, and Jon himself. Rhaegar, IMO, is saying that there is something about this song that is reflective in a certain individual. And that's Jon as the son(g) of ice and fire.

Martin definitely does like for things to have more than one meaning (or there wouldn't be so much foreshadowing in the books).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
J. Stargaryen Council Member

J. Stargaryen

Posted
Posted

Note that when we get "He is the prince that was promised, and his is the song of ice and fire", we are given his is the song, not he is the song. I'd say that makes it clear that the 'song' is a story, not a person.

The possibility that the SoIaF has a specific meaning in story doesn't rule out additional symbolic interpretations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kingmonkey Council Member

Kingmonkey

Posted
Posted

I think the song of ice and fire refers to a great many things. A battle, Others and Dragons, and Jon himself. Rhaegar, IMO, is saying that there is something about this song that is reflective in a certain individual. And that's Jon as the son(g) of ice and fire.

Agreed. The song is a whole saga of many things that ultimately come down to ice and fire. Starks/Targaryens, Others/dragons (I'll be a bit surprised if they don't fight at some point), summer/winter, south/north etc. I have a vague suspicion that swords might come into it too. We have a sword called Ice and one called Blackfyre. Could Blackfyre and Dark Sister have originally been one sword called Fire, turned into two, as with Ice becoming Widow's Wail and Lion's Oathkeeper?

My guess is that the song both starts and ends with the coming together of fire and ice. R+L is the start, and the union of fire & ice personified in Jon will end it by bringing them together again in a new pact.

All wild speculation of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BearQueen87 Council Member

BearQueen87

Posted
Posted

Agreed. The song is a whole saga of many things that ultimately come down to ice and fire. Starks/Targaryens, Others/dragons (I'll be a bit surprised if they don't fight at some point), summer/winter, south/north etc. I have a vague suspicion that swords might come into it too. We have a sword called Ice and one called Blackfyre. Could Blackfyre and Dark Sister have originally been one sword called Fire, turned into two, as with Ice becoming Widow's Wail and Lion's Oathkeeper?

That's a REALLY interesting idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MtnLion Council Member

MtnLion

Posted
Posted

Ok, I'm teasing here but really can't resist ;) ...

We have a lot to say on this very subject in the upcoming RLJ episode (E05) of Radio Westeros. Look out for it early next week :D

I am looking for ward to hearing this episode. It will be interesting to hear the tidbits all tidied up. ;)

As for the sequence of Ned's (Lyanna's and Brandon's) travel, you are spot on with your post to LV. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kingmonkey Council Member

Kingmonkey

Posted
Posted

That's a REALLY interesting idea.

Do we know of anyone wielding them before Aegon I and Visenya? Given the name "Dark Sister" it may have been intended for Visenya. With the idea that if the reigning Targ has the Targ sword and the polygamous marriage means two reigning Targs, perhaps that would be why a putative "Fire" might have been reforged into two blades?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BearQueen87 Council Member

BearQueen87

Posted
Posted

Do we know of anyone wielding them before Aegon I and Visenya? Given the name "Dark Sister" it may have been intended for Visenya. With the idea that if the reigning Targ has the Targ sword and the polygamous marriage means two reigning Targs, perhaps that would be why a putative "Fire" might have been reforged into two blades?

I assume that the family has been wielding them since the before the Doom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Patriam1066 Freerider

Patriam1066

Posted
Posted

I think the song of ice and fire refers to a great many things. A battle, Others and Dragons, and Jon himself. Rhaegar, IMO, is saying that there is something about this song that is reflective in a certain individual. And that's Jon as the son(g) of ice and fire.

I used to think that Jon was probably central, but after the way Mance manipulated him into getting himself killed with the letter sent near the end of aDwD, I'm not so sure. If you look at what Jon has actually accomplished, versus what the expectations of him are in the minds of most readers, he's a relative failure. He reminds me of Harry Potter defeating Voldemort. Harry won because of some innate bull shit that had nothing to do with his actual talent. I really hope that this isn't the way that ASOIF ends up; Jon, at this point, does not deserve to sit the Iron Throne, and he certainly doesn't deserve to be the Son(g) of Ice and Fire.

That being said, I still cheer for him... He's as moral and down to earth as it comes in the novels. I just don't think he's either very smart, talented, or capable (I'll give him talent with a sword and at command).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rhaegal Targaryen Council Member

Rhaegal Targaryen

Posted
Posted

I used to think that Jon was probably central, but after the way Mance manipulated him into getting himself killed with the letter sent near the end of aDwD, I'm not so sure. If you look at what Jon has actually accomplished, versus what the expectations of him are in the minds of most readers, he's a relative failure. He reminds me of Harry Potter defeating Voldemort. Harry won because of some innate bull shit that had nothing to do with his actual talent. I really hope that this isn't the way that ASOIF ends up; Jon, at this point, does not deserve to sit the Iron Throne, and he certainly doesn't deserve to be the Son(g) of Ice and Fire.

That being said, I still cheer for him... He's as moral and down to earth as it comes in the novels. I just don't think he's either very smart, talented, or capable (I'll give him talent with a sword and at command).

Held the wall against thousands of wildliings,negotiated with Stannis succesfully,dealt effectively with The Karstarks and arranged the Alys-Sigorn wedding,his advices not only provided Stannis reinforcements but saved him multiple times,elected LC at the of 16.I guess i could call him talented,capable and smart for his age.Last but not least,we dont know if Mance wrote the letter,dont make assumptions.

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.
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...