Greymoon Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Melisandre is viewing visions that are not actual events. Robert is viewing actual snow on the ground. Come on man It's not how 'real' the situation is that matters, but it's that GRRM chose specific words and gave them a specific order, that is important. Robert could not have had that conversation with Ned at all or it could have been worded differently. The way it is worded however, implies there is a second, more subtle meaning to the words. This second meaning is directed at the readers. It's not for Ned, or Robert or any in-universe character to understand. Think of it as...a second voice, that's speaking at the same time as Robert. This second voice, does not belong to Robert and is not speaking to Ned. It belongs to GRRM, and he is speaking to us, for our benefit. There's a dialogue happening inside the book, in-between the characters, and there is another dialogue, happening over the book, between GRRM and his readers. This dialogue manifests through imagery, the use of symbols, double entenders, figures of speech or other forms of foreshadowing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Leftwich Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 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. In a word, yes. The examples of Bolton-Jaime and Cersei killing Robert play out within a few episodes of each other and are pretty straight forward. And still a surprise for people who had not read the books. For people who have read the books, the Red Wedding is already a cat out of the bag, so there is no reason not to use the good writing (I'll give my regards to Stark) that is in the book. The identity of Jon's mother is a longer game within the show and still a long game in the books. As for the HotU, I have no answer. They chose a different direction, to just cover Dany-centric visions. Though there is a lot of snow is them. When there is no internal monologue of thought, the story has to be told differently. When you see events as opposed to read words, the story has to be told differently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markg171 Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Come on, you. Your arguments are some of the worst I've ever seen on these forums in my ~2.5 years.Deny anything I said there as not true. Visions are up to Melisandres interpretation. Roberts talk of snow relies on him physically seeing snow on the ground, which he does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markg171 Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 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. ;)Theories rely on being able to stand up to criticism. If you can't handle that, you have no theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Stargaryen Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 Deny anything I said there as not true.Visions are up to Melisandres interpretation. Roberts talk of snow relies on him physically seeing snow on the ground, which he does. So? And, if I'm denying anything, it's your ability to grasp subtext. Simply repeating what the text literally says hardly constitutes an argument. I mean, you do understand that subtext actually exists, right? You are aware of things like foreshadowing and metaphor, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MtnLion Posted December 10, 2014 Author Share Posted December 10, 2014 Theories rely on being able to stand up to criticism. If you can't handle that, you have no theory. I differ, it is not a theory, in my mind, since GRRM has already written that Jon is Lyanna and Rhaegar's trueborn heir. Now, how would you like to see it written so that you would believe, too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Twinslayer Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 “Why aren’t you [Jon Snow] down in the yard?” Arya asked him.I can see your point, in that this quote could work the way you read it (that Joffrey's is a bastard so he can't hit Jon because Jonnis secretly a Targaryen prince). I think it works as well or better as forshadowing for the revelation that Joffrey is a bastard and the fact that Jon will soon become a prince under Robb's wil. I also think that casting Jon as a Targaryen prince is inconsistent with the theory that Jon was a king from the moment of his birth (meaning he was never a prince).But I'll admit that this quote is much better for your theory than the King under Snow quote, which, in my opinion, can't be read as a reference to Jon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MtnLion Posted December 10, 2014 Author Share Posted December 10, 2014 I also think that casting Jon as a Targaryen prince is inconsistent with the theory that Jon was a king from the moment of his birth (meaning he was never a prince). Prince: A prince is a male ruler, monarch, or member of a monarch's or former monarch's family. A king is a male monarch. Hmm, it seems that a prince may be a king, and a king may be a prince. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IceFire125 Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 GRRM inserting colors and word patterns just to give us more hints and reminders to take his association of Rhaegar and Jon seriously. Seventeen and new to knighthood, Rhaegar Targaryen had worn black plate over golden ringmail when he cantered onto the lists. Long streamers of red and gold and orange silk had floated behind his helm, like flames. The flames crackled softly, and in their crackling she heard the whispered name Jon Snow. His long face floated before her, limned in tongues of red and orange, appearing and disappearing again, a shadow half-seen behind a fluttering curtain.-- Prince Rhaegar burned with a cold light, now white, now red, now dark. Jon Snow turned away. The last light of the sun had begun to fade. He watched the cracks along the Wall go from red to grey to black, from streaks of fire to rivers of black ice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearQueen87 Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 GRRM inserting colors and word patterns just to give us more hints and reminders to take his association of Rhaegar and Jon seriously. Seventeen and new to knighthood, Rhaegar Targaryen had worn black plate over golden ringmail when he cantered onto the lists. Long streamers of red and gold and orange silk had floated behind his helm, like flames. The flames crackled softly, and in their crackling she heard the whispered name Jon Snow. His long face floated before her, limned in tongues of red and orange, appearing and disappearing again, a shadow half-seen behind a fluttering curtain. -- Prince Rhaegar burned with a cold light, now white, now red, now dark. Jon Snow turned away. The last light of the sun had begun to fade. He watched the cracks along the Wall go from red to grey to black, from streaks of fire to rivers of black ice. You. I like you. It's like GRRM is a fantastic author who understands metaphor and parallels and how to write a mystery or something. I'm probably way off the mark, though. Pure crackpottery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aDanceWithFlagons Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 Prince: A prince is a male ruler, monarch, or member of a monarch's or former monarch's family. A king is a male monarch. Hmm, it seems that a prince may be a king, and a king may be a prince. So Doran is King? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markg171 Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 It's not how 'real' the situation is that matters, but it's that GRRM chose specific words and gave them a specific order, that is important. Robert could not have had that conversation with Ned at all or it could have been worded differently. The way it is worded however, implies there is a second, more subtle meaning to the words. This second meaning is directed at the readers. It's not for Ned, or Robert or any in-universe character to understand. Think of it as...a second voice, that's speaking at the same time as Robert. This second voice, does not belong to Robert and is not speaking to Ned. It belongs to GRRM, and he is speaking to us, for our benefit. There's a dialogue happening inside the book, in-between the characters, and there is another dialogue, happening over the book, between GRRM and his readers. This dialogue manifests through imagery, the use of symbols, double entenders, figures of speech or other forms of foreshadowing. Yeah. Robert is absolutely flabbergasted that in the middle of summer, there' snow in the north. Hence the emphasis on snow. It's summer. And there's snow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markg171 Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 In a word, yes. The examples of Bolton-Jaime and Cersei killing Robert play out within a few episodes of each other and are pretty straight forward. And still a surprise for people who had not read the books. For people who have read the books, the Red Wedding is already a cat out of the bag, so there is no reason not to use the good writing (I'll give my regards to Stark) that is in the book. The identity of Jon's mother is a longer game within the show and still a long game in the books. As for the HotU, I have no answer. They chose a different direction, to just cover Dany-centric visions. Though there is a lot of snow is them. When there is no internal monologue of thought, the story has to be told differently. When you see events as opposed to read words, the story has to be told differently. So why not start laying clues. You think they're just going to get like 8 seasons in and Howland Reed is going to show up and be like "Oh yeah, hey Jon we actually found you in the Tower of Joy during the war. You're not Ned's" without there having been any set up? And the show did change it. The book says that Jaime Lannister sends his regards, but the show says the Lannisters send their regards. It's a change to make Jaime more likeable. The show's made plenty of changes to the books, and chief among them has been to leave out everything that you guys say references R+L=J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markg171 Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 So? And, if I'm denying anything, it's your ability to grasp subtext. Simply repeating what the text literally says hardly constitutes an argument. I mean, you do understand that subtext actually exists, right? You are aware of things like foreshadowing and metaphor, right? Interpreting subtext relies entirely on your opinion though. It doesn't make it fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearQueen87 Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 Yeah. Robert is absolutely flabbergasted that in the middle of summer, there' snow in the north. Hence the emphasis on snow. It's summer. And there's snow. The north always has light summer snows. Robert is of the south. Of course he's shocked by it. Interpreting subtext relies entirely on your opinion though. It doesn't make it fact. As does dismissing all subtext for a simple surface reading Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markg171 Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 I differ, it is not a theory, in my mind, since GRRM has already written that Jon is Lyanna and Rhaegar's trueborn heir. Now, how would you like to see it written so that you would believe, too? Where has GRRM ever written that Jon is Lyanna and Rhaegar's trueborn son? It's not written anywhere. In fact, assuming Jon is Lyanna and Rhaegar's son is a jump the reader has to reach, and making him trueborn is another jump you have reached. Nothing of the sorts is in the book, and some things you have no support for like the trueborn thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markg171 Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 The north always has light summer snows. Robert is of the south. Of course he's shocked by it. As does dismissing all subtext for a simple surface reading Yeah exactly, he's shocked. That's all there is to it. And no, dismissing subtext and reading the text itself literally is reading the facts of the story. There's no opinion to it. You can't read Robert's death and come to the conclusion that he never died. Anything but what the words on the paper physically say, is opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearQueen87 Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 Yeah exactly, he's shocked. That's all there is to it. I disagree and it goes back to the grammar of the sentence. GRRM knows how to construct an English sentence. This is a deliberate breaking of that to make the reader look at it closer. Robert--the character--and Ned--the character--aren't doing anything. GRRM is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
addicted to snow Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 Mmm, but they did show Daenerys not able to disturb snow on the Iron Throne . . . It's kinda funny learning how you see things through your R+L=J glasses... Does this board have an opinion on what Paris said regarding R+L=J? That R+L=J is too simple & George doesn't do simple... -- To me it means that GRRM will take R+L=J & the Hidden Prince Trope & allow the audience to believe that they know exactly where GRRM is going. Then GRRM will say "Not Today" & totally corrupt the idea of the trope, turning the hidden prince into Westerosi equivalent of Dr. Evil... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearQueen87 Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 It's kinda funny learning how you see things through your R+L=J glasses... Does this board have an opinion on what Paris said regarding R+L=J? That R+L=J is too simple & George doesn't do simple... -- To me it means that GRRM will take R+L=J & the Hidden Prince Trope & allow the audience to believe that they know exactly where GRRM is going. Then GRRM will say "Not Today" & totally corrupt the idea of the trope, turning the hidden prince into Westerosi equivalent of Dr. Evil... Easy. That Paris isn't going to give away one of the central mysteries of the entire series that GRRM has been working towards for over 20 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.