Jump to content

Aerys and Joanna (TWOIAF Spoilers)


Recommended Posts

http://grrm.livejournal.com/381419.html

This is the post at the end of the summer where George talks about Tyrion as his favorite character and interviewers need to stop asking this question. Notice how he refers to him as "son of Tywin."

Great find!

I think the important point is that Tywin himself doesn't know that for sure, because Aerys raped Joanna in 272. Tywin's actions make so much more sense if that's true.

Maybe that's really the direction where we should move this discussion now.

Tyrion actually is Tywin's son but nevertheless Joanna's rape did happen and Tywin could never be sure about paternity which showed in his treatment of Tyrion (though we still have no explanation why he wouldn't just send a potential Targ bastard to the Citadel/Faith/etc. I will never stop asking this question!!!). But anyway since Tywin is dead how is this newly created uncertainty going to affect the plot?

Barristan could potentially have been on KG duty that night, therefore he could tell Tyrion and/or Dany that there's a chance Tyrion is a Targ bastard and Tyrion might try bonding with a dragon which might

a ) not work because one does need Targ blood to become a dragonrider or

b ) work because Targ blood is not necessary in bonding and Tyrion has already everything else that's needed like in-depths knowledge of dragonlore, probably a smart idea to approach, fearlessness/ confidence because he believes himself to be a Targ after what Barry told him

Barristan's revelation should also lead to Tyrion going through a major identity crisis and in a weird way more guilt about killing Tywin but I almost feel there's no time for that left in two books so it probably wont happen.

It's still all a bit convoluted though. If Tyrion doesn't manage to ride a dragon he'll probably conclude he's a Lannister. But if he does become a dragonrider will he then live on in the belief he's a Targ? Could he change his mind again by coming to the realization that Targ blood is not a necessity for dragon riding by seeing some other (presumed) non-Targ ride a dragon? And how would we as readers get confirmation one way or the other?

Any other suggestions where GRRM might be going with this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any other suggestions where GRRM might be going with this?

To Dany accepting Tyrion as family, with all the ramifactions that would entail for the power games. It would facilitate the coming rise of Tyrion within her ranks.

I guess we will see Tyrion's thoughts on Nettles at some point - he may believe that she was dragonseed or he may believe she was not. That may determine his own view on the matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Skinchanging dragon is an interesting notion, but we since we now know for a certainty that there once were dragons all over the world (i.e. also in Westeros prior to the Targaryen invasion) it is kind of odd that the Children did not use dragons to get rid of the First Men. Or that the skinchanging First Men never became dragonriders.



The idea that Tyrion has to be pushed to reconsider his heritage is also not very likely - he already revealed that he believes dragonlord blood is necessary to ride a dragon (when he talked to Brown Ben he hinted as much).



However, why the hell should Tyrion believe he is bastard of Aerys', and not consider it more likely that Tywin or Tytos were fathered by, say, Prince Duncan or Egg (on Rohanne). Not to mention that AntZ is possibly still running around with the Elaena theory (and technically, it could still be possibly one of Elaena's (grand-)daughters married into House Marbrand (Rohanne Webber is to old to be a granddaughter of Elaena's).



The Aerys idea could only be raised - and convincingly backed - by somebody who might have been there and could know more than he has already said (i.e. Barristan). If a lot of people here found it difficult to buy the theory on the basis of ADwD alone (let alone on what we know now), I really don't see how GRRM could successfully have Tyrion/Dany/Barristan draw the (wrong) conclusion 'Tyrion must be Aerys' son'.



Tyrion himself does never suspect that he is not his father's son, and Barristan's behavior does indeed show signs that he may know more about the things that happened between Joanna and Aerys. If the time line would fit for Aerys to father Tyrion, and if Aerys did indeed sleep with Joanna at that time, and if he ens up a dragonrider, then no one could ever prove that Tyrion was not Aerys' son.



AntZ,



there is no giant red herring in there I could see. In fact, GRRM did not build up 'the dragonriding is a Targaryen thing' thing in the main series at all. All we got is that dragons are drawn to dragon blood (Brown Ben), and that Dany believes you can only claim one dragon, not multiple dragons at the same time. All this commentary on dragon heads and stuff comes from conversation with fans who think ahead. He won't prove anything wrong or right for the casual reader if some random guy suddenly tames a dragon with a whip, because that's essentially what Dany did, too.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Skinchanging dragon is an interesting notion, but we since we now know for a certainty that there once were dragons all over the world (i.e. also in Westeros prior to the Targaryen invasion) it is kind of odd that the Children did not use dragons to get rid of the First Men. Or that the skinchanging First Men never became dragonriders.

Why do you assume that there were still dragons in Westeros when the First Men arrived?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, this is the SSM quote in question.

5. Since all of their mothers died, who gave Jon Snow, Daenerys Targaryen and Tyrion Lannister their names?

Mothers can name a child before birth, or during, or after, even while they are dying. Dany was most like named by her mother, Tyrion by his father, Jon by Ned.

It's worded in a way that makes it strange to state that "Tyrion was named by his [adopted] father" if he's being coy about Tyrion's paternity, but then go on to name "Ned" as Jon's namer in this context, since we get that Ned is Jon's adoptive father.

Either he could have stated "Dany was named by her mother, Tyrion by his father, and Jon by his father" or "Dany was named by Rhaella, Tyrion by Tywin, and Jon by Ned" if A+J was a thing.

There is a chance he didn't want to sound redundant: X was named by his father, Y by his mother, and Z by his father. I'm not discussing nor arguing, btw, is just a comment. Ned is Jon's father: he named him, he raised him he loved him. And in a way, also is Tywin for Tyrion: he might have not loved him but he raised and in a way, shaped him. Until the Tysha incident, which destroyed him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a chance he didn't want to sound redundant: X was named by his father, Y by his mother, and Z by his father. I'm not discussing nor arguing, btw, is just a comment. Ned is Jon's father: he named him, he raised him he loved him. And in a way, also is Tywin for Tyrion: he might have not loved him but he raised and in a way, shaped him. Until the Tysha incident, which destroyed him.

I get that you're playing devil's advocate, but the logical way to phrase this-- to avoid redundancy and render both Jon and Tyrion's paternity more mysterious-- would have been one of the following answers to that question:

  • "Dany by her mother, and Tyrion and Jon by their fathers"

"Dany by Rhaella, Tyrion by Tywin, Jon by Ned."

The way it's set up sets Jon's supposed "father" apart from the other two parents implicated in the question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get that you're playing devil's advocate, but the logical way to phrase this-- to avoid redundancy and render both Jon and Tyrion's paternity more mysterious-- would have been one of the following answers to that question:

  • "Dany by her mother, and Tyrion and Jon by their fathers"
  • "Dany by Rhaella, Tyrion by Tywin, Jon by Ned."
The way it's set up sets Jon's supposed "father" apart from the other two parents implicated in the question.

Agree, tbh. OTOH, if he had said anything "suspicious", and if had been indeed true, he would have given too much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but neither of the examples Bumps gave qualify as "suspicious," surely?

Only "Ned", which is similar to him saying that Rhaenys died, but not saying Aegon did (something like that). If we're only taking this SSM, I'd say that proves that Tywin is his father, biological father.

(otoh, people keep believing Rhaegar is alive, despite SSM saying he was cremated).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think magical ability is a pre-requisite in this.

Aegon and Dany are the two Targ "heads" to people in-universe. Jon is the other lead Targ to readers. Bloodraven and Aemon might qualify as the "old dragons" per Moqorro's "dragons young and old (para.)" speech to Tyrion.

ETA: Jon is not "ice." Yes, Jon of of the North, but he represents balance/ reform/ mediation in every facet of his being, from his policies to the gods he worships (the old gods =/= ice). His wolf is a wierwood avatar. He's not an ice extreme.

Well I point out magic because 2 of the three you named have it. They also share these prophetic dreams. Now maybe Aegon does as well but that is not known or even hinted at. Bloodraven on the other hand shares this ability, so does Bran.

Aemon is dead so I am not sure he qualifies as part of that vision.

In universe and out of universe? Bloodraven would actually cover both, people just don't know he is alive in universe and out of universe Aegon has his detractors. So that can become a convoluted debate and has on many occasions.

One possible tell that could be in the future is Thoros. Jon is with Mel, in a sense and Moqorro is on his way to Dany. That's two for two, so if Thoros goes to someone that could be a tell. Or at least another red priest.

Jon is not ice? Well see people go there when I say he is ice but again I am just talking about symbolism. The wall is an Ice extreme and he is it's commander. Though the Wolf avatar thing I find very interesting. Now you say it is a weirwood avatar, but it is also the sigil of house Stark which leans more towards a certain side of his family as do the Old gods. Would you call it a balanced avatar between Ice and Fire or north and south or religion or what have you?

With religion Jon may let his men choose there gods, but that was practiced before him all over the country. I know he is no fan of the red god and I doubt he cares much for the drowned god which is an old god. Even with the Old gods Jon worships one aspect of that. Jon does not walk a line between them himself, he worships the Old gods. That's not really balance between religion. The Old gods are far more symbolic of the north? Like how Dragons are associated more with the south like KL and Valyria? But getting back to the Old gods, and weirwoods, isn't there currently a Dragon in a tree, an old god and isn't that tree armored in ice? Didn't Jon also dream of being armored in Ice? Now some call it Ebony but Jon never said that, Jon called it Black Ice and it's not the only time he said it, he spoke also of the black ice on the wall and he knows the difference between ebony and black ice.

Touching on religion in the books, I have not seen anyone in the books with religious balance. Now I don't really want this to be a religious debate, and there are to many aspect with any person to really discuss balance as in reality humans tend to be chaotic in many different ways. Like his vows, those are not balanced at all they are an extreme and he does try to stick to them. KG same thing it's an extreme. His deal with the Braavosi was good balanced deal. But his plan with Pyke was not balanced or thought out, it was rash and he ignored the advice of someone with more insight then himself.

Now Reform? Yes Jon tries his hand at reform, not always successfully but he tires. But you yourself wrote about Dany also being an agent of change, in both cases I feel you are right. But as with people things get complex with change.

Jon seems I wouldn't say ultra balanced but rather very human. He does have highs and lows. When he sent the ships to Hardhome that was not balanced mediation that was do what you are told and I don't care what you say. So I just kind of view him as normal. Like he can be happy, sad, angry, withdrawn, friendly, he's not Budda.

The old gods may not equal ice, but then again they may. Can you name all the old gods and what they symbolize? It's not just the trees. I mean what have the trees done that equals balance? Also how much is Bloodraven associated with the Old gods? I would say more than Jon. Though it is an extreme. I mean you know how tough it is the fire and ice theme has so many different levels.

Even some of the stuff Jon has done appears to be fraying and falling apart. Wildlings and the Watch. It's tenuous at best and we have not seen all sides of it either.

Going back to extremes Dany is a fire extreme, and maybe you would need a balance between that and another head, but Aegon has no extreme. Bloodraven does, Bran does, I think Jon does but I know you don't. Also to consider is what is Jon after he gets up. What direction will this take his personality? Will he become colder? Less connected to people? He already does have a couple of extremes the watch and Old Gods are two of them, the North is another.

I guess the problem I have with Aegon is he does not feel like much to me other than a puppet and cog in someone else's machine. Is Aegon central at all or is it more about Varys? Jon feels like he has his own story plus is part of the big picture, Dany as well, I don't get that with Aegon.

In this series I look at Dragons, the Wall, and the Children as being very symbolic. I know 3 people who are connected to them. What is Aegon connected too? I can give you three dragons who have a lot of things in common but are very different people, I can't do that with Aegon. The one thing I do like about Aegon is he is of an age with Dany and Jon. But nothing else stands out to me. Well they politically all clash in the possible long run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GRRM has been doing interviews for 20 years. I would not be surprised if he has more than one slip, especially with such a sticky question. If 2 of those kids are secret Targs/bastards trying to come up with an answer on the fly would be tricky. Without GRRM dismissing Tyrion's parentpage speculation specifically, I'm reluctant to close this theory solely on that multi-part question. Especially with the tidbits about Joanna being at court a year before Tyrions birth added to the WOIAF that only confuse the situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GRRM has been doing interviews for 20 years. I would not be surprised if he has more than one slip, especially with such a sticky question. If 2 of those kids are secret Targs/bastards trying to come up with an answer on the fly would be tricky. Without GRRM dismissing Tyrion's parentpage speculation specifically, I'm reluctant to close this theory solely on that multi-part question. Especially with the tidbits about Joanna being at court a year before Tyrions birth added to the WOIAF that only confuse the situation.

The question in the SSM was not "who is Tyrion's biological father". It's dangerous to take more from it that what was asked, namely who named Dany (Rhaella), Jon (Ned) and Tyrion (Tywin). If people are so supremely confident that Martin here confirmed that Tywin really is the biological father of Tyrion, maybe they should write him and ask directly if that was what he meant. After all, if he casually gave it away in an answer to a fan many years ago than he would presumably have no trouble with simply answering the direct question.

Question for those who are convinced Tywin is Tyrion's biological father: are you also convinced that Tyrion won't be declared to be a Targaryen bastard anyway, by some combo of, say, Dany/Barristan/Moqorro/Marwin?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The question in the SSM was not "who is Tyrion's biological father". It's dangerous to take more from it that what was asked, namely who named Dany (Rhaella), Jon (Ned) and Tyrion (Tywin). If people are so supremely confident that Martin here confirmed that Tywin really is the biological father of Tyrion, maybe they should write him and ask directly if that was what he meant. After all, if he casually gave it away in an answer to a fan many years ago than he would presumably have no trouble with simply answering the direct question.

Question for those who are convinced Tywin is Tyrion's biological father: are you also convinced that Tyrion won't be declared to be a Targaryen bastard anyway, by some combo of, say, Dany/Barristan/Moqorro/Marwin?

It was who gave them their names, he stated his father. He would never give a direct answer.

Why would any of them do that? Say Tyrion and his stunted legs find away to ride a dragon(I doubt it but lets play along) they could easily and far more likely point out he had Targ blood in his ancestry, and with someone like Aegon IV walking around in the past, that is always possibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apple Martini,



why shouldn't I? The giants were too stupid to kill off all the dragons, and all we know of the Children suggests that they lived in unison with nature, suggesting that they would not eradicate the dragons.



Conclusion:



They were still there when the First Men arrived. However, they could have not survived the Long Night.



For me, sufficient proof of Tyrion's heritage should be



- Tyrion becomes a dragonrider without the help of Dragonbinder (or only with the help of Dragonbinder if it requires 'dragon blood' to work correctly).



- Barristan Selmy (or another guy who could have been witness) comes forth and tells the story how Aerys and Joanna had intercourse in 272 AC, and makes it clear that this was roughly nine months before Tyrion's birth.



If we have that, GRRM himself won't be able to discredit this revelation easily later on.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me, sufficient proof of Tyrion's heritage should be

- Tyrion becomes a dragonrider without the help of Dragonbinder (or only with the help of Dragonbinder if it requires 'dragon blood' to work correctly).

Well, I envision something like this: Dragonbinder gets sounded, Victarion tries to claim a dragon, gets fried. Tyrion claims the dragon.

Alternatively, Tyrion might be forced to blow the dragonbinder - maybe because Victarion captures him and Moqorro suggests it? Yet won't die from it and ditto. So, Dragonbinder will get used, IMHO, but it will be clear that it is not as much of freebie as Vic imagines. And, of course, there is still Euron's plan, whatever it is.

- Barristan Selmy (or another guy who could have been witness) comes forth and tells the story how Aerys and Joanna had intercourse in 272 AC, and makes it clear that this was roughly nine months before Tyrion's birth..

To me, it would be enough if we find out that the visit was, indeed 9 months prior to Tyrion's birth and Aerys vanished for a few hours that night, while Tywin was somewhere public, sans Joanna. IMHO, if Tyrion is Aerys's, then the secret door to the chambers of the Hand played a role in his conception and Tyrion will figure this part on his own, given all the other details.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure I understand a lot of the contention.



We already have the "secret Targ raised by an adoptive father" angle with Jon and Ned. And it's actually developed in the case of the Jon-Ned plotline, whereas, no such development exists for A+J=T. A+J=T also doesn't serve to explain anything that would be otherwise inexplicable like R+L=J. Without R+L=J, there's no reason why Ned would have never told Jon or Cat about Jon's mother. No such outstanding questions like this are answered by an A+J=T revelation.



Martin's put in all this work developing R+L=J. To make a second main character also a secret offspring of the previous dynasty (especially with little development toward this revelation, and not setting up that revelation as being crucial to anything previously developed) makes absolutely no sense.



The idea of A+J=T being objectively true interferes with R+L=J, the Dany-Aegon-Jon dynamic, and of course, Tyrion and Tywin's relationship.



But the idea of Tyrion being Tywin's true son (biologically and otherwise), yet offering Tywin enough doubt to question this, adds productive complexity to, rather than distraction from, those points.



That Tyrion is Tywin's son, but Tywin is ambivalent about whether this is truly the case, is what's in dialogue with the rest of the book. There was already sufficient reason to understand Tywin's hatred of Tyrion, but Tywin's potential uncertainty about this makes it that much more poignant. As such, it serves to foil-- not compete with-- Ned's relationship to Jon (and even Cat's relationship to Jon): Ned knows Jon is not his son, but raises him as such, whereas Tywin's ambivalence toward his physically imperfect biological son is exacerbated by his uncertainty that Tyrion may not be his. It multiplies the meaning of Tyrion's "snarling amongst the dragons:" Tyrion's impacted the "dragons" since the moment he was conceived in light of how Tywin's relations with Aerys shaped the course of Targ history.



I'm with those who have said that the real discussion here is about Tywin's uncertainty about this. That's the aspect of this that's in conversation with the rest of the story.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tywin not being sure, with Tyrion being in reality is true son, is marginally better than Tyrion as a secret Targ, and is consistent with his in book contradictory statements.....I don't much like turning Joanna Lannister who previously came off as a solid, capable woman, so capable in fact that she could do what nobody else could, reign in Twyin....into a victim. And while it does make many of Tywin's actions more understandable and adds complexity, it also turns him too, into a victim.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure I understand a lot of the contention.

We already have the "secret Targ raised by an adoptive father" angle with Jon and Ned. And it's actually developed in the case of the Jon-Ned plotline, whereas, no such development exists for A+J=T. A+J=T also doesn't serve to explain anything that would be otherwise inexplicable like R+L=J. Without R+L=J, there's no reason why Ned would have never told Jon or Cat about Jon's mother. No such outstanding questions like this are answered by an A+J=T revelation.

Martin's put in all this work developing R+L=J. To make a second main character also a secret offspring of the previous dynasty (especially with little development toward this revelation, and not setting up that revelation as being crucial to anything previously developed) makes absolutely no sense.

The idea of A+J=T being objectively true interferes with R+L=J, the Dany-Aegon-Jon dynamic, and of course, Tyrion and Tywin's relationship.

But the idea of Tyrion being Tywin's true son (biologically and otherwise), yet offering Tywin enough doubt to question this, adds productive complexity to, rather than distraction from, those points.

That Tyrion is Tywin's son, but Tywin is ambivalent about whether this is truly the case, is what's in dialogue with the rest of the book. There was already sufficient reason to understand Tywin's hatred of Tyrion, but Tywin's potential uncertainty about this makes it that much more poignant. As such, it serves to foil-- not compete with-- Ned's relationship to Jon (and even Cat's relationship to Jon): Ned knows Jon is not his son, but raises him as such, whereas Tywin's ambivalence toward his physically imperfect biological son is exacerbated by his uncertainty that Tyrion may not be his. It multiplies the meaning of Tyrion's "snarling amongst the dragons:" Tyrion's impacted the "dragons" since the moment he was conceived in light of how Tywin's relations with Aerys shaped the course of Targ history.

I'm with those who have said that the real discussion here is about Tywin's uncertainty about this. That's the aspect of this that's in conversation with the rest of the story.

:bowdown:

:cheers:

:agree:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tywin not being sure, with Tyrion being in reality is true son, is marginally better than Tyrion as a secret Targ, and is consistent with his in book contradictory statements.....I don't much like turning Joanna Lannister who previously came off as a solid, capable woman, so capable in fact that she could do what nobody else could, reign in Twyin....into a victim. And while it does make many of Tywin's actions more understandable and adds complexity, it also turns him too, into a victim.

Like Tyrion.

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.
×
×
  • Create New...