Light a wight tonight Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 Her husband is on the Lannister side against the Starks, he is at war with Robb. So she lines up next to Joffrey instead of her brother. Seems like betrayal to me. And then there's the time Joff says he'll bring Sansa her brother's head (meaning Robb's) and she replies that maybe her brother will bring her Joff's head. She says that knowing that Joff will order her beaten. Doesn't sound like she's lined up with Joff to me, once she sees what a monster he is. It just took her a while to get the stories of bold knights and fair damsels out or her mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Light a wight tonight Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 INCEST IS A BAD THING PEOPLE. You have proof of this? The Egyptian pharaohs married their sisters and those were some long and successful dynasties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arya Targaryen Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 How is this thread still a thing? How? INCEST IS A BAD THING PEOPLE. Especially among the Stark children! If Sansa marries Jon Snow/ has a sexual encounter with him in any way, shape, or form, I will burn the books and bury the ashes with dung. Same goes for Arya, only I'd run the books through a shredder first. May I inform you that cousin marriage is not considered to be incestous as it is pretty normal in-universe and IRL, in certain countries, even in 21. century. Apparently GRRM agrees. And there is no such thing as emotional incest, at least not in-universe. You either don't fall in love with someone who you think is your sister (but luckily turns out she is not) - in that case there is no incest whatsoever-, or you do. In the latter case you definietly be tormented over a forbidden love-sort of thing (and you keep it platonic/unconsummated - so it can hardly be called incest), but as soon as you realise your love is actually OK because you are not that closely related, you will be relieved - and not feel guilty over it. Actually I think it's more like a "I must have known it deep down all along, that's why we fell in love"-sort of thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
para Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 Actually people are. And this entire thread where the argument is that Stark incest is possible due to that draft is wonderful example of how people are ready to disregard the narrative of five books for the theory of their choosing.To be fairly honest with you, my impression of this thread begs to differ. The previous thread (in which I did not partake) had about 50 percent off-topic posts and the rest was fifteen people repeating the mantra that GRRM would never ever write an ending for Jon that included quasi-sibling incest.Which was pretty dead on arrival even in the previous thread. I mean you could rename the entire series "sibling incest galore" and no one would be able to call it a lie. ASOIAF is the most sibling incest-y thing since V.C. Andrews. There is and never has more disregard for the narrative of previous five books, three novellas, the history book, the map book and the cook book than when you declare that GRRM would never writing sibling incest into his "happy ending". Come on. Who was the best king ever in Westeros? Jaehaerys I and his lovely wife Alayn... no, wait something with San.... Who cares about her name, they were the bestest, happiest royal couple ever. Oh yeah and they were siblings. GRRM already did give bestest king of Westeros a sibling incest marriage. And considered it a golden age and a golden couple. An actual happy ending involving sibling incest should not even surprise anyone who has just read the cook book. That a cousin marriage within a "bittersweet" ending is declared impossible makes me question who is disregarding what narrative.This Jon/Arya thing just makes this repeated declaration that "GRRM would never" more hilarious. It's not killing the argument, it's killing its zombie. Because yes, he would. He totally would. That doesn't mean he will. But the argument against that has to be something other than 'I don't like/he would never". It's deader than disco. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isobel Harper Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 1. I don't believe Aegon is truly a Targaryan, so unless Westeros legalizes same-sex marriage Jon's the only Targaryan available to marry. 2. She never thinks of him as a brother, though. She thinks of him as half-brother, unlike EVERY OTHER STARK. This surely is significant. 3. Jon refused the position of Winterfell because it would violate his vows. He also dreamed of being Lord of WInterfell as a child before he realized he never would be able to as a bastard. Now that he's likely to be legitimized, and released from his vows to the Watch, there is nothing stopping him of realizing his dream. 4. That depends on whether you believe that Jon was born legitimate (that Rhaegar married Lyanna and not at the point of a sword) AND that everybody else accepts it as legitimate. I don't buy that Lyanna would consent to that, GRRM has said that realistically noble women married who they were betrothed to, it was their duty. A kidnapping and a rape do not unite houses, but if Jon became a legitimized Targaryan bastard, marrying Sansa would unite the houses. 5. Got textual evidence for that? I don't recall Sansa saying or thinking anything along those lines in her more recent chapters. 6. The story is not very different from what he described, just re-arranged. Some characters have been split into multiple characters, but they still do most of what's in the letter. Arya has had aspects of her original story transferred to Sansa. Tyrion has had parts of his story become Theons. The main themes of the story are still there, and the love triangle between Jon, Arya, and Tyrion was one of the central conflicts of the story. 7. Again, Sansa did not see him as a true sibling the way the other Starks did. She saw Jon as her father's bastard and her half-brother, just because she grew up with him doesn't mean she sees him as a sibling. She does not see Theon as a sibling. We also do not know that Sansa and Jon will be on the same side, as you claim. She's currently on Littlefinger's side, not Jon's. 1. Neither was Joffrey a true Baratheon. (Or Tyrion a real Lannister if you believe Secret Targ theories about him.) I also think that the Ashford Tourney theory is a prediction on Brienne's part as well. 2. Other Starks think of Jon as their half-brother and bastard brother as well. 4. I'll have to agree with Mladen here. Even if Jon is still a (Targ) bastard and has no claim, I can still see Stark and Targaryen joining together on his behalf or due to his own negotiating. (Stark and Targaryen, and anyone else for that matter, don't need to fighting for the throne when the Others attack.) 7. See my #2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeaselPie Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 *snip* Bravo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grail King Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 Um.. Sansa's betrayals are pretty huge in both the book and the show. IMO. Just because she didn't know what the outcome would be, and came to regret it, doesn't mean it didn't happen. I don't think so, in the first incident she tried to be neutral if she did agree with Arya, Arya could most likely at minimum loose a hand, if she totaly backs Joffry, Arya could also loose her life and her wolf, so she was put between a rock and hard place and for her neutrality lost her wolf. looking at it from our position it made no matter if she told it as Arya stated, 1 or 2 wolves would have died period, and Arya could at a minimum be maimed, period. So she tried to be neutral and still lost her wolf, Arya lost her wolf but kept her hands and no matter what or when Sansa made the statement Mycah was already dead before Sansa was called. As for running to Cersei, the betrayal was totally on Ned Stark, you don't tell a murder you know what they did while your family is still with you, and Sansa only wanted the Queen to talk her father into letting her stay or at least say good bye her reward she is now a hostage, but the death of Ned and his household is on him and Cersei. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mal Malenkirk Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 Well, I used to think Sansa (or Arya) marrying Jon was ludicrous. Now that I see that GRMM at least contemplated something like it at one time, I now instead think it's unlikely. But who knows. First of all, things have to line up politically in a way that makes such a match sensible. But it can happen; Imagine for example that Rickon dies and Bran dies or never comes back to rule Winterfell. Imagine Dany wins the throne and recognize Jon as her nephew. Imagine Jon support Dany in some fashion. In that scenario, it's sensible for Dany to want Jon ruling in the North and marrying him to his cousin Sansa Stark makes a lot of political sense to preserve the Stark heritage. It'd be kinda like Aegon arranging a match between his bastard half-brother Orys Baratheon and the daughter of the last Storm king (minus the incestuous undertone). As for the personal feelings of those involved; first of all, they don't need to be in love to get married! It'd just be their duty. That being said, Jon and Sansa were not the closest siblings to start with yet still care for each other. Then they haven't seen each other in several years. Jon will have last seen Sansa when she was 12 and will meet her again at what age? 17? 18? That's quite a difference in physical appearance and could give the brain a chance to kickstart some sexual attraction, especially if they'd been informed previously they were not brother and sister, facilitating a new 'first impression' on their next meeting. I ain't exactly an incest expert (talk about a job!) but I was under the impression that a common facilitator for kids who were raised as sibling to develop a sexual attraction to each other is a prolonged hiatus followed by a reunion, especially if puberty hits in between. That's hardly the standard reaction, obviously, but it happens, and as I said if Jon and Sansa already know they ain't siblings before reuniting, it improves the odds, IMHOAANP*. Bottom line, I wouldn't bet much on it, but I can see it. Say, 10 to 1. (*In My Humble Opinion As A Non-Psychologist) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mladen Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 snip This is not about whether GRRM would have done such story. He could have. The issue here is whether he is doing such story. I mean, the original draft could have worked, but not with the characters we now have. It is not the question whether GRRM would be able to find a suitable way to make Jon/Arya, or in this question Jon/Sansa incest possible. The question is can he do it now. My opinion, based on what I have read in Jon, Sansa and Arya's POVs is that such incest is not just impossible, but completely redundant in terms of uniting families etc. Basically, the difference is that GRRM would have written differently these characters if he had the ending from original draft. Jon wouldn't think of Arya and Sansa as his sisters, he wouldn't recall so much how he messed Arya's hair, or how refer to Sansa as his sister time after time. Same is for Sansa in this debate. She refers to Jon as her brother. GRRM could have made this incest possible with the characters he had in original draft, but from the characters we have, he really has a narrow window. I would even say the window doesn't even exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeaselPie Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 ... And both incidents you describe had massive consequences to the Stark family. As I said, intentional or not, they were betrayals. Not sure how this is even a question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pod The Rod Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 You have proof of this? The Egyptian pharaohs married their sisters and those were some long and successful dynasties. Only a few of them did. Particularly the Ptolemaic dynasty. And need I remind you that we know how they turned out to look? Hideous. May I inform you that cousin marriage is not considered to be incestous as it is pretty normal in-universe and IRL, in certain countries, even in 21. century. Apparently GRRM agrees. And there is no such thing as emotional incest, at least not in-universe. You either don't fall in love with someone who you think is your sister (but luckily turns out she is not) - in that case there is no incest whatsoever-, or you do. In the latter case you definietly be tormented over a forbidden love-sort of thing (and you keep it platonic/unconsummated - so it can hardly be called incest), but as soon as you realise your love is actually OK because you are not that closely related, you will be relieved - and not feel guilty over it. Actually I think it's more like a "I must have known it deep down all along, that's why we fell in love"-sort of thing. :ack: :stillsick: :ack: :stillsick: I will not post again on this topic, so let me make this clear. Sansa and Jon are biological cousins. They were raised as siblings. They consider each other their siblings. Incest is biologically wrong because of inbreeding, I shouldn't have to explain why that is a bad thing. It is morally wrong because of the perversion of sibling, or parent-child, love that it creates. There are multiple kinds of love in this world, not just intimate and romantic. Incest strikes at the foundation of the family itself. It strikes at everything that is the bedrock of an upstanding, lasting civilization. What is being contemplated in this thread is disgusting debauchery, and there is a reason GRRM portrays the Lannister siblings as doing it when they are "evil". Jaime's rejection of Cersei and incest is a fundamental part of his redemption as a character. Jon is more closely related to Dany than he is to Sansa. Yet, it would not be morally wrong for him to marry her because he does not conceive of her as his aunt. Yet Sansa, and Arya, will always be his sister no matter what revelations come out about his parentage. Period, end of story. Also, to think there is any possibility whatsoever of this happening is to completely ignore the nature of the characters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grail King Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 How is this thread still a thing? How? INCEST IS A BAD THING PEOPLE. Especially among the Stark children! If Sansa marries Jon Snow/ has a sexual encounter with him in any way, shape, or form, I will burn the books and bury the ashes with dung. Same goes for Arya, only I'd run the books through a shredder first. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_marriage_law_in_the_United_States_by_state Some States don't think so, can't speak for other countries though; I live in one of those blue states. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhaechyll Targaryen Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 To be fairly honest with you, my impression of this thread begs to differ. The previous thread (in which I did not partake) had about 50 percent off-topic posts and the rest was fifteen people repeating the mantra that GRRM would never ever write an ending for Jon that included quasi-sibling incest.Which was pretty dead on arrival even in the previous thread. I mean you could rename the entire series "sibling incest galore" and no one would be able to call it a lie. ASOIAF is the most sibling incest-y thing since V.C. Andrews. There is and never has more disregard for the narrative of previous five books, three novellas, the history book, the map book and the cook book than when you declare that GRRM would never writing sibling incest into his "happy ending".Come on. Who was the best king ever in Westeros? Jaehaerys I and his lovely wife Alayn... no, wait something with San.... Who cares about her name, they were the bestest, happiest royal couple ever. Oh yeah and they were siblings. GRRM already did give bestest king of Westeros a sibling incest marriage. And considered it a golden age and a golden couple. An actual happy ending involving sibling incest should not even surprise anyone who has just read the cook book. That a cousin marriage within a "bittersweet" ending is declared impossible makes me question who is disregarding what narrative.This Jon/Arya thing just makes this repeated declaration that "GRRM would never" more hilarious. It's not killing the argument, it's killing its zombie.Because yes, he would. He totally would. That doesn't mean he will. But the argument against that has to be something other than 'I don't like/he would never". It's deader than disco. I agree with all of this. I've noticed when it comes to some of the more controversial theories a lot of times for fans it boils down to and "I don't like; it's inconsistent with the writing IMO" rather than it being about actual evidence. People can see for themselves that GRRM wasn't against a quasi-incestuous Stark relationship for Jon so now the chief argument has become that this doesn't ring true to the characters that we've come to know. I personally disagree. While I think that Jon/Arya is off of the table based on what we know of their sibling like relationship, I disagree that this applies to Sansa and think that there is even evidence in the books that Jon is shaping up to be the sort of man that Sansa would like to eventually be married to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeaselPie Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 ... Not sure what part of "GRRM planned for Jon to end up with Arya" was missing from your memo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Fauntleroy Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 The Stark family has been so strongly beloved by the fans because it resembles a nuclear family of the modern age. All stayed home, all had loving parents (well, except Jon, but every family has the black sheep) and loved each other. They are whom we root for because we more closely related to them than any other family. Even the family-oriented Lannisters are really really foreign to us as an audience: Jaime is fostered for a time, Cersei is cruel to Tyrion, and Tywin shows no affection for his children. Don't even get me started on the other families in the series. Boltons, Freys, Baratheons, Karstarks hell even obscure houses like the Daynes and Martells are very alienating to the layman reader. Only the Starks are normal to us, and it's intentional. There will be NO, ZERO, NADA Jon/Sansa love affair. Even adopted siblings, it's too weird. ( Dexter fans will know this) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeaselPie Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 ... Yet GRRM planned a Jon/Arya love affair. Not sure how many times this has been pointed out in this thread so I'm fairly sure anyone who uses this argument has not read the thread. Why are people arguing against this when that was the plan? /end Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taenqyrhae Posted February 5, 2015 Author Share Posted February 5, 2015 Laughing at "Incest is biologically wrong because of inbreeding" followed shortly by "It would be better for Jon to marry his aunt than his cousin." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1234567 Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 And both incidents you describe had massive consequences to the Stark family. As I said, intentional or not, they were betrayals. Not sure how this is even a question.Because you cannot unintentionally betray someone. Ned explained nothing to Sansa (even her Septa was willing to take her to say goodbye). She was disobedient and the result was getting herself trapped and nearly getting Arya trapped. If any one betrayed anyone, Ned betrayed his family and men by talking to Cersei and not protecting them. Yet I won't call what Ned did a betrayal but a mega mistake hat had titanic consequences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AryaNymeriaVisenya Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 Laughing at "Incest is biologically wrong because of inbreeding" followed shortly by "It would be better for Jon to marry his aunt than his cousin."I think Jon should keep his honour and not use magical resurrection to get out of his vows. His black brothers didnt get that option. Death was the end for them. Their vow was total. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Madam Mim Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 I agree with all of this. I've noticed when it comes to some of the more controversial theories a lot of times for fans it boils down to and "I don't like; it's inconsistent with the writing IMO" rather than it being about actual evidence. People can see for themselves that GRRM wasn't against a quasi-incestuous Stark relationship for Jon so now the chief argument has become that this doesn't ring true to the characters that we've come to know. I personally disagree. While I think that Jon/Arya is off of the table based on what we know of their sibling like relationship, I disagree that this applies to Sansa and think that there is even evidence in the books that Jon is shaping up to be the sort of man that Sansa would like to eventually be married to. The sort of man that Sansa would like to marry is currently of the half burnt variety. This is nicely is nicely explained by Le Cygne: Sandor's cloak is about Sandor for Sansa... All the repetition, and it's full of sexual and marital symbolism. All sorts of hints there, the pledge to protect, the kiss, the dagger, steel on [Alayne] stone, the bloody cloak (classic red on white consummation symbolism) she chooses, the tearing of the cloak and the blood and the bells ringing (deep throated bronze booming!) while she's huddled beneath it, dreaming of him in bed with her on her wedding night, how his cloak feels against her bare breasts, again, the tear with blood seeping, and it's his left sleeve (wearing his heart on his sleeve), treasuring his cloak in a cedar (hope) chest with her summer silks (a dream of spring), dreaming of marrying a tall strong man who kisses her and gives her his cloak and she's dreaming of a tall strong man who kisses her and gives her his cloak and she places him in the marriage bed... And Sandor is all about fire in that scene, that's about him. It's all about him for Sansa. Here are all the times she thinks of his cloak (he even goes there) and I'm sure I'm missing some. This is the author making a very strong point. Quote Quote QuoteQuote Quote Quote Quote Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.