What would hurt more? Jon permanently dying or R&L not equalling J?

[The Reckoner]

I don't mind RLJ, so long as it doesn't become a vehicle to putting Jon on the Iron Throne. I think it will put him on a much colder throne, an Ice Dragon to the Fire Dragon coming from across the seas for the next dance.

[WeaselPie]

We know Jon is not permanently dead. He's going to take a dark turn and learn about his mother etc.

As far as RLJ goes. I think a lot of people are going to be really upset if they aren't right and GRRM outwitted them. Which is what I suspect will happen.

GRRM proving you wrong does not make him a bad writer.

[Mikkel]

GRRM proving you wrong does not make him a bad writer.

Of course not, that depends in what way the "proven wrong" comes about.

[sj4iy]

We know Jon is not permanently dead. He's going to take a dark turn and learn about his mother etc.

As far as RLJ goes. I think a lot of people are going to be really upset if they aren't right and GRRM outwitted them. Which is what I suspect will happen.

GRRM proving you wrong does not make him a bad writer.

It's not about being right.

It's about the story making sense.

I think most people would agree that, if Martin comes up with an explanation for Jon's parents that makes as much or more sense than R+L=J, then it will be a pleasant surprise.

However, after everything Martin has said about people having figured out his big mystery that he started laying out in the first book, I think he's basically admitted that it's true and that he isn't going to change it just because people have figured it out.

[WeaselPie]

It's not about being right.

It's about the story making sense.

I think most people would agree that, if Martin comes up with an explanation for Jon's parents that makes as much or more sense than R+L=J, then it will be a pleasant surprise.

However, after everything Martin has said about people having figured out his big mystery that he started laying out in the first book, I think he's basically admitted that it's true and that he isn't going to change it just because people have figured it out.

People other than you think that theories alternate to RLJ make sense.

GRRM admitted nothing, and your statement is not canon.

[Lopsang]

I'd rather both happen. I am a Jon fan, but I don't buy the R + L = J theory, and they way it would have to be introduced (Howland Reed?) would have to be very clumsy, and the importance it would have to the story would either be dues ex machina-y or just unimportant.

Despite me liking him, I also hope, in a perverse way, he is dead. There was a great thread on the topic a month or so ago, shame I won't be able to find it, but I believe it was started by the Lion in the West (I remember the avatar). First of all, I think his arc can be satisfactorily completed if he died now, and second, well, he was just kind of assassinated. I don't like how GRRM REALLY has to spell out "THIS PERSON IS DEAD AND IN NO WAY CAN SURVIVE HIS WOUNDS, GET RESURRECTED, AND IS NOT PROPAGANDA/A LIE (see: Asha, Theon, Ramsay, Aegon, Catelyn, Gregor, Beric, Arya, Tyrion (twice), Bran, Rickon, Davos, Drogo, Benjen?, Stannis?, Loras?, Tyrek?, Gerion?, Quentyn?, etc...)." I feel like Jon's death is potentially one of the greatest climaxes of the series. It would be anticlimatic and useless for him to still be alive. It would be as if the moment of his death, and the emotions I felt after, were stolen from me. It would be too unrealistic.

[sj4iy]

People other than you think that theories alternate to RLJ make sense.

And some people believe the moon landing was faked. That doesn't make it true. I've yet to see any theory about Jon's parentage that makes as much sense as R+L=J. It's nothing to do with bias, unless you want to say that 'having textual evidence to support it' is biased.

GRRM admitted nothing, and your statement is not canon.

His exact words:

And then the other one was, of course, you know, I have certain things that I’m laying clues for that there will be revelations later on. Some people had put together those clues even as early as 1998, adding things together. I said, “What do I do with that? What do I do with that? These people have guessed the secret that I’m gonna reveal in book 6, people have already guessed that here and book 2 is just out.” You really have two choices there: you can ignore it and proceed with your plan, despite the fact that some people know where you’re going; or you can get all panicky and say “OMG, they’ve figured it out, I can’t let that be, I’ll have to change it, I’ll have to go in a different direction.” And I think some writers do that, and I think that’s always a mistake. You know, if you've planned your book that the butler did it, and then you read on the internet that someone has figured out that the butler did it and you suddenly change in midstream and it was the chambermaid who did it, then you screw up the whole book, because you get this foreshadowing early on and you’ve got these little clues you’ve planted and now they’re dead ends, and you have to introduce these other clues and now you’re retconning…it’s a mess.

Gee, I wonder what this secret that he started laying out very early on and plans on revealing in book 6 could possibly be?

Believe it if you want. Don't believe it if you don't want to. But just because you don't like it doesn't mean it doesn't have a TON of evidence to support it...moreso than any other theories concerning Jon's parents. Like I've said above...if Martin can come up with an alternative explanation that makes as much or more sense as R+L=J with the evidence to support it, then I will have absolutely no problem whatsoever with that. I go where the logic points.

[WeaselPie]

And some people believe the moon landing was faked. That doesn't make it true. I've yet to see any theory about Jon's parentage that makes as much sense as R+L=J. It's nothing to do with bias, unless you want to say that 'having textual evidence to support it' is biased.

His exact words:

And then the other one was, of course, you know, I have certain things that I’m laying clues for that there will be revelations later on. Some people had put together those clues even as early as 1998, adding things together. I said, “What do I do with that? What do I do with that? These people have guessed the secret that I’m gonna reveal in book 6, people have already guessed that here and book 2 is just out.” You really have two choices there: you can ignore it and proceed with your plan, despite the fact that some people know where you’re going; or you can get all panicky and say “OMG, they’ve figured it out, I can’t let that be, I’ll have to change it, I’ll have to go in a different direction.” And I think some writers do that, and I think that’s always a mistake. You know, if you've planned your book that the butler did it, and then you read on the internet that someone has figured out that the butler did it and you suddenly change in midstream and it was the chambermaid who did it, then you screw up the whole book, because you get this foreshadowing early on and you’ve got these little clues you’ve planted and now they’re dead ends, and you have to introduce these other clues and now you’re retconning…it’s a mess.

Gee, I wonder what this secret that he started laying out very early on and plans on revealing in book 6 could possibly be?

Believe it if you want. Don't believe it if you don't want to. But just because you don't like it doesn't mean it doesn't have a TON of evidence to support it...moreso than any other theories concerning Jon's parents. Like I've said above...if Martin can come up with an alternative explanation that makes as much or more sense as R+L=J with the evidence to support it, then I will have absolutely no problem whatsoever with that. I go where the logic points.

That confirms nothing.

[sj4iy]

That confirms nothing.

I never said it 'confirmed' anything. I said it he's admitted he's not going to change his answer simply because people have figured it out. A lot of people seem to think he will do that, but he's stated, very plainly, that he won't because it would screw up his story.

[WeaselPie]

I never said it 'confirmed' anything. I said it he's admitted he's not going to change his answer simply because people have figured it out. A lot of people seem to think he will do that, but he's stated, very plainly, that he won't because it would screw up his story.

So?

[Baltasar]

Jon being dead. Everything else is just fluff. I'd be happier with him as a bastard stark than a targ. I don't plan on being happy on that part. Still my favorite pov regardless where he falls.

Are these being tallied or just a general feeling out of the community?

My "vote" would be for whatever is a better story. I enjoy Jon, one of my favorite characters, but the aspect that would make me dejected would be the story suffering wherever his story goes.

In the end, I am of the mind with Jon, that in the end, let it be said Ned Stark fathered 4 sons.

[unitron]

As long as we find out who Jon's parents were, I don't much care who they turn out to have been.

[Jay21]

The moon landing was totally faked.