What's the stupidest theory you've read ?

[Jon's Queen Consort]

I think to some extent it's possible that r+l=j. However, that doesn't make it plausible. A theory can very well be possible, and factually, it could happen. However, PLAUSIBILITY means that it makes sense from a narrative perspective, and the author is likely to write it. The facts could line up sufficiently for Daario to be Benjen, or whatever theory, but completely lacks plausibility, and is therefore stupid.

Are this serious? Because frankly I am not sure and I hope that it isn't.

[Drogon'sWrath]

I think to some extent it's possible that r+l=j. However, that doesn't make it plausible. A theory can very well be possible, and factually, it could happen. However, PLAUSIBILITY means that it makes sense from a narrative perspective, and the author is likely to write it. The facts could line up sufficiently for Daario to be Benjen, or whatever theory, but completely lacks plausibility, and is therefore stupid.

Out of curiosity, what is it about R + L = J that you find so implausible? I'm assuming you already know all of the foreshadowing that points to it and the evidence that backs it up, so I'll spare a paragraph or two and just ask what's so implausible about it? I mean, the foreshadowing wouldn't be there if GRRM didn't intend to follow through with it.

[Endac]

I like you, and I like the post.

That being said..... stupidest isn't proper English :(

So your post is pretty stupid. <3

[Lopsang]

Out of curiosity, what is it about R + L = J that you find so implausible? I'm assuming you already know all of the foreshadowing that points to it and the evidence that backs it up, so I'll spare a paragraph or two and just ask what's so implausible about it? I mean, the foreshadowing wouldn't be there if GRRM didn't intend to follow through with it.

I would be poor writing on all accounts. It wouldn't make sense for Jon's arc, and it wouldn't make sense in the context of the story. Are we to believe that Howland Reed (or some priest or something), out of left field, will definitively change the course of Jon's story and the story as a whole, despite 1,000s of pages of prior buildup? Jon's arc is so great because he IS a bastard. He gets along with Tyrion, forging a friendship between the Starks and Lannisters. He goes to the wall, and based solely on his merit, and tons of difficulty, becomes a great commander. All the hardships he went through in the Night's Watch, and his election as LC, would be meaningless, if just before the climax came, Jon was revealed as a secret Targaryen. Despite all his work in the Night's Watch, his trials as a bastard, and all the other contenders that have been built up, like Stannis, Dany, and Aegon, JON of all people gets the throne? How will that fit into the story adequately? Stannis's storyline would mean nothing if Jon were to just magically trounce him. Aegon coming back would be equally pointless. If Dany came to Westeros, that would be pointless too. Besides, speaking of Aegon, GRRM JUST pulled that card. Why would he do practically the same thing twice? It would be stupid for Jon to get a smooth ride to the throne just because his mommy is Lyanna and his daddy is Rhaegar.

We can see, though, that Jon would never ever be the king. First of all, Targaryen supporters will side with Aegon. That includes Dorne, Illyrio/Varys, Connington, maybe the Tyrells, etc. Jon will yield no swords. The Night's Watch is not enough, and neither are the wildlings. Jon is also one of the few people to care about the threat of the Others. He's spent his whole arc at the Wall. I see no reason why that would change. It would be out of character, Jon would have to ignore the Others and the protection of the wall, which he is obviously dedicated to, and break his vows and desert. He's already had conflict with his vows; when he ran off to Mole Town in ACoK and in the whole things with turning his cloak. It was resolved, both times, with him sticking to his vows. He would have to stop supporting Stannis, who he seems to like, at least marginally. And why? Why would GRRM do all that? How will it satisfy the reader? How would it be done?

So let's say Jon is revealed to be Rhaegar and Lyanna's son, but is not destined to be king. Okay, so who cares? Why would it even matter? The only reason why Jon being half-targaryen would be important is if he was another head of the dragon and whatnot, so we have to go by that premise. I see no other reason for him to have Targaryen parentage. Is it just for him to try to get the throne, but die in the attempt? GRRM could have just done with with the assassination attempt.

Tl;dr: Howland Reed making Jon the next king on the Iron Throne is totally unrealistic.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Tl;dr: Howland Reed making Jon the next king on the Iron Throne is totally unrealistic.

There are plenty of R+L=J adherents, maybe even most of them, who don't believe this will happen. Many of them don't think Jon will even be king at all. Others think Howland won't be the one to reveal his parentage. And plenty of people acknowledge that even if Howland does reveal Jon's parentage, he won't necessarily be believed.

As for why it matters that his parents are Lyanna and Rhaegar, it's right there in the series' title.

Basically, if "Howland will make Jon king" is what you get out of R+L=J, you haven't read about it enough.

[Lord Reaver]

I like you, and I like the post.

That being said..... stupidest isn't proper English :(

So your post is pretty stupid. <3

Not everyone is a native english-speaker. Not mastering english grammar does not automatically constitute lack of intelligence. How is your Swahili? Or your Cantonese?

[Mladen]

There are plenty of R+L=J adherents, maybe even most of them, who don't believe this will happen. Many of them don't think Jon will even be king at all. Others think Howland won't be the one to reveal his parentage. And plenty of people acknowledge that even if Howland does reveal Jon's parentage, he won't necessarily be believed.

As for why it matters that his parents are Lyanna and Rhaegar, it's right there in the series' title.

Basically, if "Howland will make Jon king" is what you get out of R+L=J, you haven't read about it enough.

I agree

And then there are those who believe that Jon will become the King DESPITE his parentage. The options about this are so wide... And R+L=J doesn't necessarily presume Jon ending on the Throne.

[King of the Rock]

Daario being anyone but Daario.

This on so many levels.

Jaime, Cersei, or Tyrion being Targaryen's.

Howland Reed using magic to defeat Arthur Dayne.

AAR in general.

R + L = J

Rhaegar being alive.

[sj4iy]

I like you, and I like the post.

That being said..... stupidest isn't proper English :(

So your post is pretty stupid. <3

And considering that 'stupider' and 'stupidest' are featured in the American Heritage Dictionary:

https://www.ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=stupider&submit.x=0&submit.y=0

And the American Oxford Dictionary:

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/stupid

I would say there absolutely isn't a set 'right' or 'wrong' way to make the word 'stupid' into a comparative adjective in "proper English", since it only has two syllables.

[Endac]

Not everyone is a native english-speaker. Not mastering english grammar does not automatically constitute lack of intelligence. How is your Swahili? Or your Cantonese?

Who said anything about lack of intelligence? I found it ironic, and a bit funny, actually.

coming from someone of intelligence, I assume you would find the irony too.

My Swahili is okay, but I have a problem with the accent sometimes, which is okay because I have a couple of friends from Burundi and Mozambique who help with that.

My Cantonese is flawless.

[Endac]

And considering that 'stupider' and 'stupidest' are featured in the American Heritage Dictionary:

https://www.ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=stupider&submit.x=0&submit.y=0

And the American Oxford Dictionary:

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/stupid

I would say there absolutely isn't a set 'right' or 'wrong' way to make the word 'stupid' into a comparative adjective, since it only has two syllables.

Congrats on looking in a dictionary, or online.

Either way it's improper English.

You don't say lucidest, you say more lucid

you don't say timidest, you say more timid

Need I list more?

Improper English is improper English, move on.

[Kingmonkey]

So let's say Jon is revealed to be Rhaegar and Lyanna's son, but is not destined to be king. Okay, so who cares? Why would it even matter?

Maybe for all the reasons you listed above?

Maester Aemon turned down the Iron Throne to stay at the wall. Jon already turned down the offer of becoming Lord of Winterfell to stay at the wall. Perhaps the whole point of R+L=J is so that Jon can turn down the Iron Throne (or never be in a position to be even considered a claimant) due to reasons of "too late, vows. Suck on that destiny." Not to mention because it's easy to imagine the idea of a secret rightful KING of ALL having more important things to do being something GRRM would enjoy (See also: Captain Carrot of the Night Watch in Discworld).

Then of course there's all the theories about R+L=person to stop the Others, rather than R+L=rightful KING of ALL.

[sj4iy]

Congrats on looking in a dictionary, or online.

Either way it's improper English.

You don't say lucidest, you say more lucid

you don't say timidest, you say more timid

Need I list more?

Improper English is improper English, move on.

Two different dictionaries consider it an acceptable superlative adjective form, yet you consider yourself the 'authority' on the subject.

It's not improper English just because you don't like it.

[Drogon'sWrath]

I would be poor writing on all accounts. It wouldn't make sense for Jon's arc, and it wouldn't make sense in the context of the story. Are we to believe that Howland Reed (or some priest or something), out of left field, will definitively change the course of Jon's story and the story as a whole, despite 1,000s of pages of prior buildup? Jon's arc is so great because he IS a bastard. He gets along with Tyrion, forging a friendship between the Starks and Lannisters. He goes to the wall, and based solely on his merit, and tons of difficulty, becomes a great commander. All the hardships he went through in the Night's Watch, and his election as LC, would be meaningless, if just before the climax came, Jon was revealed as a secret Targaryen. Despite all his work in the Night's Watch, his trials as a bastard, and all the other contenders that have been built up, like Stannis, Dany, and Aegon, JON of all people gets the throne? How will that fit into the story adequately? Stannis's storyline would mean nothing if Jon were to just magically trounce him. Aegon coming back would be equally pointless. If Dany came to Westeros, that would be pointless too. Besides, speaking of Aegon, GRRM JUST pulled that card. Why would he do practically the same thing twice? It would be stupid for Jon to get a smooth ride to the throne just because his mommy is Lyanna and his daddy is Rhaegar.

We can see, though, that Jon would never ever be the king. First of all, Targaryen supporters will side with Aegon. That includes Dorne, Illyrio/Varys, Connington, maybe the Tyrells, etc. Jon will yield no swords. The Night's Watch is not enough, and neither are the wildlings. Jon is also one of the few people to care about the threat of the Others. He's spent his whole arc at the Wall. I see no reason why that would change. It would be out of character, Jon would have to ignore the Others and the protection of the wall, which he is obviously dedicated to, and break his vows and desert. He's already had conflict with his vows; when he ran off to Mole Town in ACoK and in the whole things with turning his cloak. It was resolved, both times, with him sticking to his vows. He would have to stop supporting Stannis, who he seems to like, at least marginally. And why? Why would GRRM do all that? How will it satisfy the reader? How would it be done?

So let's say Jon is revealed to be Rhaegar and Lyanna's son, but is not destined to be king. Okay, so who cares? Why would it even matter? The only reason why Jon being half-targaryen would be important is if he was another head of the dragon and whatnot, so we have to go by that premise. I see no other reason for him to have Targaryen parentage. Is it just for him to try to get the throne, but die in the attempt? GRRM could have just done with with the assassination attempt.

Tl;dr: Howland Reed making Jon the next king on the Iron Throne is totally unrealistic.

As Apple Martini pointed out, there aren't many R + L = J supporters that think he'll wind up on the throne. I know I don't. That said, it'll add a certain layer of poetic irony to the character. The boy who could have been living the high life in KL had Rhaegar gotten his way has instead spent his life as a bastard in WF and then at the Wall. He hasn't lived a bad life, but he also hasn't lived a princely life.

Then there's the angle of him possibly being the rightful king, or at least a claimant. As you said, Jon has already had two tests to his oath. But remember that Maester Aemon, another Targaryean, had three. There's a reason that was mentioned; Jon will have a third test to his oath. Don't you see the poetic symbolism in this?

Now, I don't know how his potential parentage will reach public ears, and I'm sure most won't believe them anyway. But Howland Reed was a close friend of Ned Stark's and was at the TOJ with him; I wouldn't put it past him to convince some of the Northern Lords of this. That could be a catalyst of him having to face the temptation yet again of breaking his vows. And it would add yet another complication in fighting the Others. Jon, I'm sure, will not give into this temptation of breaking his vows, but in this scenario he would have to try and convince the Northerners that a more important war is coming, and not to worry about getting him on the throne.

Now, I'm not saying this is exactly how it goes down. But it is one possible, plausible scenario. The R + L = J theory has a hell of a lot of foreshadowing and evidence backing it up, almost to the extent that it would be bad writing if that isn't the case. Yes, there's disagreement over the specifics. Some think Rhaegar and Lyanna married, some believe the kidnapping story, others think he'll sit the throne, and still others believe that Rhaegar was right about the PTWP and that Jon is the embodiment of that prophecy. And if that's the case, R + L = J is pretty damn important.

Edit: Also, you seem to be assuming Aegon is really who he claims to be. It would be very GRRMesque to first reveal a red herring hidden Targ before giving us the real deal.

[Visenya Stark]

The stupidest theories I've read are those which suggest R+L=/=J.

[Victarion Chainbreaker]

I'm an English teacher. 'Stupidest' is fine. It's applicable to people who argue with the dictionary over what proper English is.

[Lord Reaver]

Who said anything about lack of intelligence?

You did:

stupid

ˈstjuːpɪd/

adjective

adjective: stupid; comparative adjective: stupider; superlative adjective: stupidest

1.

lacking intelligence or common sense.

[Hype_Train_Conductor]

I once read that Geiron Lannister was actually Euron Greyjoy.

[Lady Blizzardborn]

I don't think I could choose just one, but I would like to point out a few things:

Ashara's body was never found, we have no eye-witness accounts of her supposed suicide, and she gets brought up a lot for a dead woman who has no impact on the story--at least compared to other female characters who were dead before the story began and had no apparent reason to be mentioned repeatedly and yet somehow were. :read:

Daario can be Daario and still be something more, like, say a Blackfyre descendant.

Aegon actually could be Aegon.

Benjen is not listed as dead in any of the books' appendices.

This thread is not about English. Back on topic, people!

[Lady Blizzardborn]

I once read that Geiron Lannister was actually Euron Greyjoy.

And Syrio too! ;)