R+L=J v.118

[markg171]

I've seen people say that when Robert jokes that the small folk in the North are hiding from the King under the late summer snow, it really means that there is a King in the North hiding from another King under the name "Snow." It usually involves abbreviating the quote to cut out the reference to the small folk.

It's just people looking for things that aren't there.

[markg171]

You mean this?

You are correct that Robert was referring to the people of the north hiding, not kings hiding, but the way it is written, with Ned mentioning kings and Robert responding by mentioning Snow, is taken to be a hint or subtle clue by many, myself included.

He mentions snow because it's summer and it's still snowing in the North. This isn't hard to understand.

[Alia of the knife]

Apparently it is.

Its called a double entendres.

[Ser Leftwich]

You're right. It's a TV show. if you want to put a blue rose in the scene, you can put a blue fucking rose in the scene. Not a blue panel that looks nothing like a rose.

One: Subtlety is a thing. If you show flashbacks of Ned talking to Lyanna or Rhaegar giving Lyanna the crown at the TOH, that gives away the game. Also, there is quite a blatant blue rose that show Daario give to Dany, which happens at a later time. Clues/imagery build over time.

Two: Tone it down.

ETA: Also, take into account: are these clues to viewers that have read the books or viewers who have not read the books or both at the same time? Again, subtlety is a thing.

[Greymoon]

He mentions snow because it's summer and it's still snowing in the North. This isn't hard to understand.

When Melisandre sees snow in her fires...it's only snow flakes she sees? like Alia said, GRRM makes use of double entendres. There is the immediate, in-universe context and the immediate, in-universe explicit meaning. Then, there's the subtle, less immediate, out-of universe, implicit meaning, the one GRRM is aiming at us, the readers.

.......................

And since we are on the topic, does that count?

Jaime speaking to Red Ronnet Connington...

"Your father." Jaime eyed Red Ronnet's surcoat, where two griffins faced each other on a field of red and white. Dancing griffins. "Our late Hand's...brother, was he?"

"Cousin. Lord Jon had no brothers."

"No." It all came back to him.

Jaime III, aFfC, p. 585 US parperback

Of course, right after Jaime's thoughts turn to Rhaegar and how Rhaegar couldn't be found. But what was Rhaegar doing?

When Merryweather failed so dismally to contain Robert's Rebellion and Prince Rhaegar could not be found, Aerys had turned to the next best thing and raised Connington to the Handship.

[sj4iy]

If Martin really wanted it to be foreshadowing, he would have written it like this:

Robert: Hey look, Ned. Is that your bastard?

Ned: No, he's actually the legitimate son of Rhaegar Targaryen and Lyanna- oops! I mean, yes, yes he is my bastard.

Because that's how foreshadowing is written.

[The Twinslayer]

It 's supposed to be a subtle hint. Of course, "Jon Snow = King in hiding" is not the primary sense here. It is a double meaning. A wordplay.

I just can't see it.

But this reminds me that in the last thread we talked about whether there had ever been a King in the North or Lord of Winterfell who was a bastard. There has also been some discussion recently about whether Jon woukd have a claim to the Iron Throne if he is a bastard.

The entry on Benjen in the app says that Benjen stayed in Winterfell during the Rebellion but that he joined the Warch once Ned, Robb and Jon got back to Winterfell and the Stark line was secure. This really implies that Ned had the proverbial heir (Robb) and spare (Jon). So if it had just been Robb, Benjen would have stayed until Bran was born. That is pretty interesting -- within the last year, Rickard and two of his children died unexpectedly, but one true born son and one bastard are enough that Benjen is no longer needed. Ned must have been very sure that the North would accept a bastard as Lord of Winterfell.

If we also consider that half the realm rose for Daemon Blackfyre, I think bastardy will not be the obstacle to Jon's ascension, if that is the way the story goes, as some think it is.

It also means that even if he is a bastard he was born with a claim to the Iron Throne. In that case, Viserys would be crowned on Dragonstone and Rhaella and Jon would be his heir and spare. Viserys would still be a lot worse off than Ned: Ned was an adult and a proven war leader with two healthy sons. Viserys was a child with one boy he did not know about plus his mother in a realm that had never accepted a woman as its ruling Queen. Protecting Jon would be very important if the Targaryen dynasty was to survive.

[sj4iy]

I just can't see it.

But this reminds me that in the last thread we talked about whether there had ever been a King in the North or Lord of Winterfell who was a bastard. There has also been some discussion recently about whether Jon woukd have a claim to the Iron Throne if he is a bastard.

The entry on Benjen in the app says that Benjen stayed in Winterfell during the Rebellion but that he joined the Warch once Ned, Robb and Jon got back to Winterfell and the Stark line was secure. This really implies that Ned had the proverbial heir (Robb) and spare (Jon). So if it had just been Robb, Benjen would have stayed until Bran was born. That is pretty interesting -- within the last year, Rickard and two of his children died unexpectedly, but one true born son and one bastard are enough that Benjen is no longer needed. Ned must have been very sure that the North would accept a bastard as Lord of Winterfell.

If we also consider that half the realm rose for Daemon Blackfyre, I think bastardy will not be the obstacle to Jon's ascension, if that is the way the story goes, as some think it is.

It also means that even if he is a bastard he was born with a claim to the Iron Throne. In that case, Viserys would be crowned on Dragonstone and Rhaella and Jon woukd be his heir and spare. Viserys would still be a lot worse off than Ned: Ned was an adult and a proven war leader with two healthy sons. Viserys was a child with one boy he did not know about plus his mother in a realm that had never accepted a woman as its ruling Queen. Protecting Jon would be very important if the Targaryen dynasty was to survive.

I suppose this is simply a straight-forward statement, as well:

“Why aren’t you down in the yard?” Arya asked him.

He gave her a half smile. “Bastards are not allowed to damage young princes,” he said. “Any bruises they take in the practice yard must come from trueborn swords.”

[MtnLion]

derf markg, chill dude. If you can't see it, it is not our fault. If you still can't see it, this is not your place. ;)

[The Twinslayer]

I suppose this is simply a straight-forward statement, as well:

Why arent you down in the yard? Arya asked him.

He gave her a half smile. Bastards are not allowed to damage young princes, he said. Any bruises they take in the practice yard must come from trueborn swords.

Perhaps. But I am open to the idea that this is some foreshadowing for Robb -- we can't have bastard Joffrey damaging the future King in the North.

Works for Jon, too, now that Robb legitimized him and made him a prince.

[markg171]

One: Subtlety is a thing. If you show flashbacks of Ned talking to Lyanna or Rhaegar giving Lyanna the crown at the TOH, that gives away the game. Also, there is quite a blatant blue rose that show Daario give to Dany, which happens at a later time. Clues/imagery build over time.

Two: Tone it down.

ETA: Also, take into account: are these clues to viewers that have read the books or viewers who have not read the books or both at the same time? Again, subtlety is a thing.

Are you honestly trying to argue subtlety is the answer here, when the show has never once given any hint that Jon isn't Ned's son? Hell they didn't even put in the rose in the Wall in the House of the Undying scene which is what started this discussion right now. They've erased every single reference to Jon being anything other than Ned's.

Keep in mind that this is the same show that had no problem betraying the Red Wedding ahead of time by having Bolton tell Jaime he was going to give Robb his regards, and that Cersei was going to kill Robert. The show will foreshadow things. They have completely erased any foreshadowing of Jon being anything other than Ned's son, which doesn't fit in with what they do when they're trying to hint at something to come.

[J. Stargaryen]

Perhaps. But I am open to the idea that this is some foreshadowing for Robb -- we can't have bastard Joffrey damaging the future King in the North.

Works for Jon, too, now that Robb legitimized him and made him a prince.

“Why aren’t you [Jon Snow] down in the yard?” Arya asked him.

[markg171]

When Melisandre sees snow in her fires...it's only snow flakes she sees? like Alia said, GRRM makes use of double entendres. There is the immediate, in-universe context and the immediate, in-universe explicit meaning. Then, there's the subtle, less immediate, out-of universe, implicit meaning, the one GRRM is aiming at us, the readers.

.......................

And since we are on the topic, does that count?

Jaime speaking to Red Ronnet Connington...

Jaime III, aFfC, p. 585 US parperback

Of course, right after Jaime's thoughts turn to Rhaegar and how Rhaegar couldn't be found. But what was Rhaegar doing?

Melisandre is viewing visions that are not actual events. Robert is viewing actual snow on the ground. Come on man

[J. Stargaryen]

Melisandre is viewing visions that are not actual events. Robert is viewing actual snow on the ground. Come on man

Come on, you. Your arguments are some of the worst I've ever seen on these forums in my ~2.5 years.

[The guy from the Vale]

Perhaps. But I am open to the idea that this is some foreshadowing for Robb -- we can't have bastard Joffrey damaging the future King in the North.

Works for Jon, too, now that Robb legitimized him and made him a prince.

But when applied to that scene, it doesn't mnake sense. Joffrey is a bastard, not a prince. Robb is not a prince; he becomes king by acclamation, not by inheritance.

So, we want the truth of the statement in connection with the situation preserved, we already have a bastard now - Joff. Now we have one excess bastard and no young prince. But curiously enough, there are tons of hints throughout the books that imply that Jon isn't actually Ned's bastard, but indeed a king's grandson and hence a young prince. The sentence goes from Jon moping and some character development/description into being both that and an inherently ironic statement because it is entirely true when applied to the situation, but things are exactly the opposite way of Jon's intention.

[MtnLion]

Hell they didn't even put in the rose in the Wall in the House of the Undying scene which is what started this discussion right now.

Mmm, but they did show Daenerys not able to disturb snow on the Iron Throne . . .

[The guy from the Vale]

Are you honestly trying to argue subtlety is the answer here, when the show has never once given any hint that Jon isn't Ned's son? Hell they didn't even put in the rose in the Wall in the House of the Undying scene which is what started this discussion right now. They've erased every single reference to Jon being anything other than Ned's.

Keep in mind that this is the same show that had no problem betraying the Red Wedding ahead of time by having Bolton tell Jaime he was going to give Robb his regards, and that Cersei was going to kill Robert. The show will foreshadow things. They have completely erased any foreshadowing of Jon being anything other than Ned's son, which doesn't fit in with what they do when they're trying to hint at something to come.

Ned, to Jon, in GOT season I: "You don't have my name, but you still have my blood." Why no reference to "son" in that statement, why the close connection to the actual text, if the subtlety of the wording here isn't important?

Why does Ned almost tear up about Jon's mother when they say goodbye?

Why are Rhaegar and Lyanna even referred to in the series when actual POV characters like

Arianne

have been scrapped? What is their importance? You could definitely write the obvious part of the story so far without any reference to these two.

And all that is just off the top pf my head; there's a series of threads in the GOT part of the forum that focuses on series hints on R+L=J, and they are quite numerous.

[BearQueen87]

Does that mean that the plural pronoun "they" is used to describe the individual named "Jon Snow" and that the past tense ("were hiding") is used to describe what Jon is doing in the present?

No. Look at the subjects.

"I've never seen such a vast emptiness. Where are all your people?"

"Likely they [the people] were to shy to come out," Ned jested. He could feel the chill coming from up the stairs, a cold breath from deep within the earth. "Kings are a rare sight in the north."

Robert snorted. "More likely they [the kings--new subject as introduced by Ned] were hiding under the snow. Snow, Ned!" The king put one hand on the wall to steady himself as they descended.

It's the second "they"

Robert is talking about people. But Ned has switched subject of the sentence and KINGS are now the closest subject for an antecedent. But GRRM doesn't have Robert say "people" again like he should to be grammatically correct--in order to switch back to the original subject. Now the subject of "they" is kings. It's a subtle grammatical thing

[sj4iy]

Perhaps. But I am open to the idea that this is some foreshadowing for Robb -- we can't have bastard Joffrey damaging the future King in the North.

Works for Jon, too, now that Robb legitimized him and made him a prince.

Uh, except that Robb IS getting 'bruised' by a bastard's sword, so this interpretation of yours makes no sense.

And it wouldn't work for Jon being legitimized later because time travel didn't exactly exist :P

[BearQueen87]

If Martin really wanted it to be foreshadowing, he would have written it like this:

Robert: Hey look, Ned. Is that your bastard?

Ned: No, he's actually the legitimate son of Rhaegar Targaryen and Lyanna- oops! I mean, yes, yes he is my bastard.

Because that's how foreshadowing is written.

Damn. I must have missed that lesson in school