Legal Advance Review of TWOIAF

[The Wolves]

I'm glad for that. Neither Robert of Joffrey were going to read this beautiful book. Ever.

Neither is Tommen, heh :-)

[butterbumps!]

The book was written originally for Robert, but Robert died before the book was finished, so Yandel decided to dedicate the book to Joffrey. Then Joffrey died, and Yandel still had either not finished, or not yet presented his book. So he dedicated it to Tommen.

The whole "Robert, Joffrey, Tommen" joke is from Yandel (though he was most likely being serious). One of the first pages contains a "handwritten" introduction, dedicating the book to the King, where you can see the names of Robert and Joffrey crossed out. The next page contains an introduction of sorts, where Yandel tells a bit about himself.

You can see it in the preview :) (3rd page, IIRC)

ah, thank you. So......it's a case where Yandel should be fired, lol. (I mean, if it contains really juicy A+J stuff he failed to redact for Cersei's 2 kids).

Of course, my dear non-believer.

http://i.imgur.com/CxQkJHK.jpg

It's from the previews we had a few months ago.

I wasn't a non-believer-- I just wanted explicit confirmation, because seriously, what sense does it make to write something that would compromise the king's legitimacy if you're not trying to purposely screw him over?

Why would it undermine any "Baratheon" parties, if it could, say, only apply to Tyrion? And one would only know the significance of whatever it is because of all the other things we know about Tyrion, that maester wouldn't have been aware of?

I was going by Apple's comments that suggested it was more about A+J generally, with more probably toward Cersei and Jaime's implication, but that fans would play up the Tyrion thing because they want him to be a dragonrider. But in general, suggestion that Joanna and Aerys were an item would kind of like open Tommen's rule to even more accusations, which I would think a maester without agenda might not want to do, especially in light of how there's flyers saying he's an "abomination born of incest" already.

[Consigliere]

I was going by Apple's comments that suggested it was more about A+J generally, with more probably toward Cersei and Jaime's implication, but that fans would play up the Tyrion thing because they want him to be a dragonrider. But in general, suggestion that Joanna and Aerys were an item would kind of like open Tommen's rule to even more accusations, which I would think a maester without agenda might not want to do, especially in light of how there's flyers saying he's an "abomination born of incest" already.

I don't think it will be something explicit. More like a piece of info that reinforces the existing theory (I'm talking about A+J=T here. Assuming that this is the theory in question). Something like placing Aerys and Joanna in the same place (KL or CR) around the time when Tyrion would have been conceived.

[Bael's Bastard]

If it pertains to Aerys+Joanna, I doubt it is anything juicy or explicit.

[bent branch]

I don't think it will be something explicit. More like a piece of info that reinforces the existing theory (I'm talking about A+J=T here. Assuming that this is the theory in question). Something like placing Aerys and Joanna in the same place (KL or CR) around the time when Tyrion would have been conceived.

I agree. One scenario that I can imagine is that Tywin is mentioned as having undertaken a mission to Lys for Aerys around the time Tyrion was conceived. This type of information wouldn't by itself prove Tyrion was Aerys' bastard, but would put into deeper question Tyrion's parentage.

[butterbumps!]

I don't think it will be something explicit. More like a piece of info that reinforces the existing theory (I'm talking about A+J=T here. Assuming that this is the theory in question). Something like placing Aerys and Joanna in the same place (KL or CR) around the time when Tyrion would have been conceived.

well, sure that's possible. Something like an indication that Joanna was around Aerys at an appropriate time for Tyrion's birth, without openly suggesting an affair, wouldn't compromise Tommen. Totally cool, and I don't find this contradictory to anything. But I think Apple knows something about this that suggests it's not specific to Tyrion-- something that nods to A+J, and looks more applicable to Tyrion's siblings as per her comments. That's really the source of all my confusion in here. Because a generalized rumour of A+J seems like the sort of thing someone who is not purposely trying to screw over Tommen would not write. lol, maybe I need to go talk to Apple. Get her in here.

[Consigliere]

well, sure that's possible. Something like an indication that Joanna was around Aerys at an appropriate time for Tyrion's birth, without openly suggesting an affair, wouldn't compromise Tommen. Totally cool, and I don't find this contradictory to anything. But I think Apple knows something about this that suggests it's not specific to Tyrion-- something that nods to A+J, and looks more applicable to Tyrion's siblings as per her comments. That's really the source of all my confusion in here. Because a generalized rumour of A+J seems like the sort of thing someone who is not purposely trying to screw over Tommen would not write. lol, maybe I need to go talk to Apple. Get her in here.

Okay I went back to Apple's posts and, yeah, she really left us hanging. She needs to get back in here and elaborate on this 'stuff' she's heard.

[butterbumps!]

Okay I went back to Apple's posts and, yeah, she really left us hanging. She needs to get back in here and elaborate on this 'stuff' she's heard.

lol, yea, see, I'm not crazy. So that's why I came in here and was so adamant about confirmation that it was 100% definitely for Tommen, and/ or what the maester's angle was, because based on her comments, it really looked like the maester was running an anti Tommen racket.

[Lord Varys]

Whatever we learn about Aerys, Joanna, Rhaella, and Tywin should not be a direct confirmation of anything. Merely a suggestion whether certain paternities are possible or impossible, insofar as the time line is concerned. The attraction angle between Joanna and Aerys could also be discussed, depending on whether Aerys' liberties during the bedding was something widely known or not.

There should not be rumors abound about the bastard birth of any of Tywin's children because Tywin and Aerys ruled the Realm at that point. Whoever dared stating something fishy went on in regards to the golden twins and the hideous dwarf would have faced their wrath.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

ah, thank you. So......it's a case where Yandel should be fired, lol. (I mean, if it contains really juicy A+J stuff he failed to redact for Cersei's 2 kids).

I wasn't a non-believer-- I just wanted explicit confirmation, because seriously, what sense does it make to write something that would compromise the king's legitimacy if you're not trying to purposely screw him over?

I was going by Apple's comments that suggested it was more about A+J generally, with more probably toward Cersei and Jaime's implication, but that fans would play up the Tyrion thing because they want him to be a dragonrider. But in general, suggestion that Joanna and Aerys were an item would kind of like open Tommen's rule to even more accusations, which I would think a maester without agenda might not want to do, especially in light of how there's flyers saying he's an "abomination born of incest" already.

But Cersei being or not being a bastard does not change anything about Tommen's legitimacy :) Cersei was legitimately married to the King, and any child she would have by him would be his trueborn children. The fact that Cersei did not have any children with Robert, makes Tommen a bastard. Cersei's own parentage does nothing to make that worse or better.

[Consigliere]

lol, yea, see, I'm not crazy.

Hmm...I don't quite believe you. :P

[butterbumps!]

But Cersei being or not being a bastard does not change anything about Tommen's legitimacy :) Cersei was legitimately married to the King, and any child she would have by him would be his trueborn children. The fact that Cersei did not have any children with Robert, makes Tommen a bastard. Cersei's own parentage does nothing to make that worse or better.

I realize that Cersei and Robert married. But there's already rumours that Tommen's a "bastard born of incest." Planting a rumour of Tommen's mother as potentially illegitimate-- and a Targ bastard at that, known for their practice of incest-- is not the thing you really want to be writing about in your history unless you're trying to screw with Tommen. There's also the issue that someone who cares might challenge Cersei's union with Robert as fraud and so forth. In general, this just isn't the best publicity for your king.

[Lonin]

A + J = T.... never liked that theory... I was thinking that the info would not be that explicit

Something like:

1) More details of the Aerys, Rhaella, and Rhaegar relationship - could go many ways.

2) More details on the ambitions of Rickard Stark (Brandon as well).

3) Additional details on the tourney at Harrenhall.

[Bael's Bastard]

Where are you getting this stuff about planting a rumor about illegitimacy? I don't think anything so blatant or explicit will appear.

[butterbumps!]

Where are you getting this stuff about planting a rumor about illegitimacy? I don't think anything so blatant or explicit will appear.

Is this to me? I feel like I've caused so many problems in this thread, I'm sorry. Here-- this is what I've been speaking to, especially the second one:

Yes. Without a doubt.

ETA: I still don't think it's true. But I've heard ... stuff ... that leads me to believe Aerys/Joanna gets a nod.

ETA 2: Weirdly enough, it's actually because Aerys/Joanna allegedly gets a nod that I think the Tyrion thing isn't actually true. It comes off like GRRM's dangling it too much, if that makes sense. It's almost baiting. It could also be a case where the book mentions Aerys/Joanna but stops short of implying an affair, leading people to conclude that the book says something that it actually doesn't, sort like how everyone thinks a Stark dishonored Ashara at Harrenhal when that isn't actually what was said.

Without pulling my skirt up too high, let's hypothetically say that maybe the Aerys/Joanna material could equally apply to the twins, if not more so than Tyrion, but that it's Tyrion who will probably get the attention because of the higher popularity of the theory relating to him.

Not that the maester would have written anything that boldly states Cersei is Aerys' bastard or anything. But anything that gets too close to an anecdote that leaves room for the possibility that she's an incest-practicing Targ bastard isn't in Tommen's interest to be written about in light of the rumours that Tommen's a bastard born of incest.

ETA: I think I see the issue-- I said "planting the rumour." Sorry, I was trying address the issue of whether Cersei's being outed as Aerys bastard would impact Tommen's rule. I don't think the text would be "planting" the rumour directly. But in light of the incest rumours about Cersei's kids, I'm not sure why a maester writing a history for them would go anywhere near that direction.

[Kingmonkey]

Quite obvious that Moqorro knows the "glory" he's seen for Victarion is not his successful seizing of a dragon.

Yeah.

The black priest bowed his head. "There is no need. The Lord of Light has shown me your worth, lord Captain. Every night in my fires I glimpse the glory that awaits you."

- aDwD ch.63

A "glory" can mean a suffusion or aura of light. Moqorro sees this in his fires every night, unusual for a vision, but usual if what he's looking at is flames.

Victarion's for the barbecue.

[Annara Snow]

Rather than Martin trying to tease us down a false path, I think his concern may rather be the opposite - namely that the hints of Tyrion's true parentage are not apparent enough in the main series, for the casual reader. And that Tyrion suddenly popping up as a bastard Targaryen, just in time to ride a dragon, might come across as a bit contrived to readers who don't study the text to the level of detail that we do in this forum.

Of course, it is patently obvious that Tyrion is Aerys's bastard. It is just the people that absolutely hate the very idea of it that need to accept that they were wrong all along. They will come around, eventually.

Of course, it is patently obvious that Tyrion is Tywin's son. It is just the people that absolutely love the very idea of "Targ Tyrion super speshul dragon rider who totally did not commit patricide and who's too good for the Lannister family" that need to accept that they were wrong all along. They will come around, eventually (but probably only when the main series confirms it 100%).

[anonnyscouse]

I think the Tyrion is a Targ theory carries weight simply because he is GRRM's favourite character so people believe he will survive the series for that reason (I personally doubt that). As the kinslayer is cursed in the eyes of men and Gods in Westeros it seems unlikely a kinslayer could have a good ending so the only way for Tyrion to survive is for Tywin not to be his father.

[RumHam]

Of course, it is patently obvious that Tyrion is Tywin's son. It is just the people that absolutely love the very idea of "Targ Tyrion super speshul dragon rider who totally did not commit patricide and who's too good for the Lannister family" that need to accept that they were wrong all along. They will come around, eventually (but probably only when the main series confirms it 100%).

Obviously I don't speak for everyone who thinks Aerys might by Tyrion's biological father, but I don't think that reveal would absolve him of the sin of killing Tywin at all. The man raised him (for better or worse) and was a father to him.

Edit: Tyrion's mother is still definitely a cousin to Tywin. So if it makes you feel better he'd still be a kinslayer

I think the Tyrion is a Targ theory carries weight simply because he is GRRM's favourite character so people believe he will survive the series for that reason (I personally doubt that). As the kinslayer is cursed in the eyes of men and Gods in Westeros it seems unlikely a kinslayer could have a good ending so the only way for Tyrion to survive is for Tywin not to be his father.

The idea that people decided Martin won't kill Tyrion and then worked backwards from there to create this theory is ridiculous.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Okay I went back to Apple's posts and, yeah, she really left us hanging. She needs to get back in here and elaborate on this 'stuff' she's heard.

OK, to explain ...

To Bumps, I don't think it's explicit enough to suggest that Cersei's a bastard, just that Aerys and Joanna had a ... history, I guess. If you were in-story, i.e. Tommen, and reading it, I don't think it would dawn on you that the maester might be claiming the Lannister kids were Targ bastards (I don't think he's making that claim at all, only describing a complicated court relationship between Aerys, Joanna, Tywin and Rhaella). But if you're a reader and looking for anything to validate a theory you already like and want to be true, then you could look at the maester's writing, and conclude based on your existing ideas that GRRM might be getting at something with it.

The point is though that whatever is in the book that a reader could use as "evidence" regarding Tyrion could also be used as "evidence" regarding Jaime and Cersei. Rather than be a silver bullet for one Targ theory or another, the most it actually does is leave the door ajar for both. But because "Tyrion is a Targ" is more popular, that's the one that will get the attention, regardless of whether it's the option that's true, if either of them is. It's still possible, and probably likely, that all of Tywin's kids are his.