Heresy 152 [Spoilers]

[wolfmaid7]

Just thought I'd add this passage so we have it to refer to. I highlighted some potentially relevant parts.

1) Tales they heard from Ned's soldiers??? Which soldiers would that be? Howland Reed? I thought nobody else survived?

2) Funny, no mention of Howland helping out. Ned slew Dayne in single combat. Really?

3) Ok so Ashara was still alive (and present) when Ned arrived at Starfall.

4) Wow he really doesn't want people talking about Jon's mom.

5) Cat apparently made a valiant effort to have Jon sent away, and Ned refused. Because he loved his mother so much.

Further proof that sometimes people embelish facts a "teenie bit".Howland was probably lacing up his boots .

Howland: " Alright there Ned,i just about got it,just one more sec."

Ned: "No no take your time Reed don't sweat it you know i got this. Dayne ain't s**t."

Clearly Ned recollection trumps the soldiers who.... em weren't there.

Oh yeah Ashara was alive in this rendition huh ,i guess that could explain Cersci telling Ned that Ashara killed herself because "Ned stole her baby."

I give the fellas from WF props for knowing how shut people up.Ashara's name got the Bael the Bard treatment.It went away quick.

[JNR]

Notwithstanding, to the faithful anyone who doesn't agree is either blind, ignorant or a troll. After the stunned silence which saw most of the current R+L=J thread taken up with Valentines greetings and discussions of the real world weather they now appear to be settling back into the old regime of "textual analysis" whilst ignoring the first synopsis and completely dismissing the second. Neither fit their particular world view and therefore don't exist.

Well, that's really no surprise. I imagine that if the next book reveals Jon's parents, that book won't exist either. (Notice that after the Great Disappointment, there were still Millerites.)

Is he going to go all 5th element and stuff and stand between factions to forge a convergence that.....sigh i'm getting a headache. You see where I'm going with this?

I believe I do. And I don't think the 5th Element scenario is at all likely.

Why? Because if it were necessary for someone to be half-Targ and half-Stark to deal with a Long Night, Westeros obviously never would have survived the first one. At the time of AGOT, the land would be covered with nothing but Popsicles, from the Frozen Shore to Dorne, all doing this: :cheers: .

so its far too premature at this moment to say that GRRM has abandoned this particular storyline from the synopsis

Yet it's perfectly correct to say he has abandoned the concept of Jon and Arya being tormented by their deathless passion throughout the series.

And they aren't going to change that any time soon; they aren't even on the same continent. Meanwhile, we have only two books to go.

So if GRRM still wants it to happen, he's going to have to cobble together a deathless passion at the last minute.

[Black Crow]

While I agree there is very much a sense of Ned feeling guilty about something, I always interpreted this guilt as relating to the promise, and certain lies Ned apparently has been telling. After he reveals to Robert how the Lannisters betrayed the Targaryens and he found Jaime on the throne, Robert basically says the Targs had it coming and he wouldn't lose any sleep over it. To which Ned reflects that he did lose sleep over it. He had lived his lies for 14 years, yet they still haunted him at night. There is clearly guilt here, but Lyanna is not involved.

Later, he reflects on how he always keeps his promises, and the price he has paid for it. There is definitely something that happened that Ned isn't proud of, but I personally don't see him feeling guilty for her death.

Also: Ned tells Arya that the wolf blood led Lyanna to an early grave. He believes her actions led to her fate.

I agree up to a point in that I don't believe Ned was directly responsible for her death, but rather that it may have been the family involvement and in particular what his father and elder brother were up to in an undeclared rivalry with the Lannisters in whatever Rhaegar was up to which got her killed and left him to pick up the bits.

[Frey family reunion]

While I agree there is very much a sense of Ned feeling guilty about something, I always interpreted this guilt as relating to the promise, and certain lies Ned apparently has been telling. After he reveals to Robert how the Lannisters betrayed the Targaryens and he found Jaime on the throne, Robert basically says the Targs had it coming and he wouldn't lose any sleep over it. To which Ned reflects that he did lose sleep over it. He had lived his lies for 14 years, yet they still haunted him at night. There is clearly guilt here, but Lyanna is not involved.

Later, he reflects on how he always keeps his promises, and the price he has paid for it. There is definitely something that happened that Ned isn't proud of, but I personally don't see him feeling guilty for her death.

Also: Ned tells Arya that the wolf blood led Lyanna to an early grave. He believes her actions led to her fate.

Hmm yes. If the plan was to get rid of Aerys and have Cersei marry Rhaegar, the crowning of Lyanna would have been cause for concern. Maybe that's why Lyanna had to be removed from the picture?

While his conscious thoughts seem to indicate sadness and guilt over Jon's situation, his subconscious seems to hint at a repressed horror over the promise that Lyanna extracted from him. His son, Bran seems to have the same issue when his subconscious brings him back to his fall from the tower.

[Joe Pine]

I agree up to a point in that I don't believe Ned was directly responsible for her death, but rather that it may have been the family involvement and in particular what his father and elder brother were up to in an undeclared rivalry with the Lannisters in whatever Rhaegar was up to which got her killed and left him to pick up the bits.

So was Lyanna essentially a piece of meat, dangled to Rhaegar, before he took too much interest in Cersei?

Rickard and Brandon underestimated how loopy Aerys was and rather than some sort of settlement over Rhaegar (I'm guessing a wedding?), they died instead?

[Black Crow]

...it's perfectly correct to say he has abandoned the concept of Jon and Arya being tormented by their deathless passion throughout the series.

And they aren't going to change that any time soon; they aren't even on the same continent. Meanwhile, we have only two books to go.

So if GRRM still wants it to happen, he's going to have to cobble together a deathless passion at the last minute.

No necessarily. As I pointed out maintaining a relationship through a trilogy which incorporates a five year gap is one thing, maintaining it through five books and counting while that gap is laboriously filled is quite another. Moreover another point to consider is Arya's own mental and spiritual development. She was caught up in a massacre and saw her father executed, then tried to head for the Wall but instead found herself wandering through the devastated Riverlands in a situation that would have taxed Simpliccimus with the eventual result that she ends up a cold-blooded psychopath training as an assassin. Yet she still secretly clings on to Needle and so an eventual relationship with Jon may provide the healing which she needs.

[wolfmaid7]

Well, that's really no surprise. I imagine that if the next book reveals Jon's parents, that book won't exist either. (Notice that after the Great Disappointment, there were still Millerites.)

I believe I do. And I don't think the 5th Element scenario is at all likely.

Why? Because if it were necessary for someone to be half-Targ and half-Stark to deal with a Long Night, Westeros obviously never would have survived the first one. At the time of AGOT, the land would be covered with nothing but Popsicles, from the Frozen Shore to Dorne, all doing this: :cheers: .

On a whole i agree.

While his conscious thoughts seem to indicate sadness and guilt over Jon's situation, his subconscious seems to hint at a repressed horror over the promise that Lyanna extracted from him. His son, Bran seems to have the same issue when his subconscious brings him back to his fall from the tower.

Thank you for bringing this up again FFR.The last time we spoke of this this it didn't quite get the traction but Bran's reaction to what Ned told him in his dream is very telling.Certainly finding out your Aunt is really the mother of your brother and Rhaegar should be enough to give one such a reaction.Also,Lya made several promises to and one of them a real doozy.

[Black Crow]

So was Lyanna essentially a piece of meat, dangled to Rhaegar, before he took too much interest in Cersei?

Rickard and Brandon underestimated how loopy Aerys was and rather than some sort of settlement over Rhaegar (I'm guessing a wedding?), they died instead?

It may not have been quite so blatant as that, but something of that nature provides an explanation for the remark about Southron ambitions, if those ambitions were not merely a matter of marrying well but of involvement in plotting to depose or at least bridle the Targaryens - in other word the Game of Thrones, begun long before the first book opens.

[JNR]

No necessarily. As I pointed out maintaining a relationship through a trilogy which incorporates a five year gap is one thing, maintaining it through five books and counting while that gap is laboriously filled is quite another.

He didn't conceive of the five-year gap until much later. In Oct 1993, he was planning a straight-up trilogy, no gap, in which

Their passion will continue to torment Jon and Arya throughout the trilogy

Throughout means in all three books -- the entire series.

Well, he's 5/7ths -- 70+% -- through the series, and there's still no tormenting passion. It should have shown up in book one; it never did. Nor in book two, nor book three, nor book four, nor book five.

When is it going to show up? Ever? Is there any room for it in the last two books? Would readers believe it, if he somehow squeezed it in? I doubt it. Instead, he went with Ygritte and now, it certainly appears he's setting up Val.

[Armstark]

Yes to the bolded parts! I have been suggesting for a while now that Tywin played a role in starting RR. Aerys had been sh*tting on him for years and years, and when he stole his heir that was the last straw. What does Tywin do when someone pisses him off? He extinguishes their entire families- just ask the Tarbecks and the Reynes. The assumption that he would have taken all these insults lying down does not fit the character. In fact, we know that he was ready to risk the king's death at Duskendale, and apparently said publicly that if the Darklyns kill Aerys, the realm would have a better king in Rhaegar.

Who benefitted the most from RR? Well, maybe Robert, but the Lannisters certainly improved their lot considerably. Cersei is queen, Lannister children will inherit the crown. Tywin is once again feared and respected. And all the Targaryens are dead. (Almost.) He has had his revenge.

Tywin Lannister played the game of thrones to win (it's even in his name) and the way the game has evolved over the centuries (it's about a single throne now after all) to win is to be hand and your daughter to be married to the king/crown prince. Tywin wanted to win the game like Robar Baratheon, Otto Hightower or Brynden Rivers did before him and the Mad King denied him. But somehow Tywin managed to win in the end...

The feeling I got from the World Book and the sections leading up to the Tourney at Harrenhal is that somehow the Lannister's were much more involved, the whole Tywin-Aerys dynamic comes to its culmination at the tourney with Jaime's introduction into the King's Guard.

Maybe Tywin even had a sick satisfaction from the incest of his children. If the game is to put your blood on the throne isn't a full-blooded Lannister even better? A King with the purest Lannister blood in generations to start Lannister rule of the Seven Kingdoms in the new century.

[Matthew.]

Quite. We need to bear in mind that although the series has stretched and otherwise expanded to fill the infamous five year gap we can't really have Jon and Arya being tormented by their feelings for each other until they and in particular she is growed up sufficiently to have those feelings. When she and Jon last saw each other she was still a skinny little tomboy. In Braavos she's growing up and we have hints that she's going to end up returning by way of Eastwatch so its far too premature at this moment to say that GRRM has abandoned this particular storyline from the synopsis, far less devised a different reason for keeping Jon's mother a secret.

I sure hope not. They were still raised from (her) birth as siblings, so that would still be a really gross relationship, in my opinion. Also, if the payoff after seven books is "Hey guys, remember all of that 'Promise me' stuff, and the uncertainty around Robert's Rebellion? Well, Surprise! Jon gets to fuck Arya!" then... well, honestly, I'd prefer the cliche options. :mellow:

[Voice]

Your right he kept this mystery till the "end" of the series which would have accomplished nothing except get Jon and Arya together. Which is how I took it. It seemed to have no bearing on the overall story as it pertains to any other resolution.

And now that Jon and Arya are not an item of concern, why does it remain a mystery, withheld for the end of the series? It doesn't make sense to do that anymore, if is doesn't have any bearing on the overall story...

Again the story has grown in the telling but as I said if we compare the story today with the synopsis we can easily see what's still a factor and what's not.

Can we? I don't think it's that simple to be honest.

The synopsis gives us the broad strokes. Those broad strokes remain relevant in the telling of the tale as published, but the letter does nothing for our understanding of these fine details, like the mystery of Jon's parentage....except of course, the revelation that it is a "secret" to be "revealed in the last book."

That wording sounds far more significant than some are making it out to be. Granted, the RLJ crowd have made far too much of it, which I'll get to, but I think we are very much mistaken to make light of the "secret of Jon's true parentage."

Lyanna is only half of that secret. Her contribution alone to Jon's DNA does not satisfy the import of saving the reveal for the final book, in either the 1993 letter, or in the tale-grown.

As it stand in a scenario where Jon's parents are revealed we have to consider who will it matter too.Will people care and how does him being a Targ/Stark going to stop the crap that both fire and ice are bringing?

Precisely. Who will it matter to if Jon is Lyanna's son? Lyanna might be the face of the rebellion, but other than that, she's already served her purpose in the story. She doesn't matter anymore.

Every reader already believes Jon to be a son of a Stark, and to have Stark blood flowing in his veins. Lyanna does absolutely nothing to enhance his ancestry, nor the story. So why save that for the last book?

Now of course, if she's revealed to be sitting under WF's heart tree, that's a whole other ballgame, but until then... ;)

The deception has always been two-fold. As Tyrion reveals, "some woman" was probably his mother. But is it isn't because of her we meet Jon.

For the general readership, he has been included as a character in the series because he is the Lord Eddard Stark's bastard. Readers will continue to believe so, and Jon will continue to illustrate the inner-torment of his loyalty (love) for House Stark (Arya) while still fulfilling his duty (NW) "until the secret of Jon's true parentage is finally revealed in the last book."

Is he going to go all 5th element and stuff and stand between factions to forge a convergence that.....sigh i'm getting a headache. You see where u'm going with this?

I do :)

And no. That is where the RLJ crowd goes too far. But just as being Targaryen-messiah zealots tends to cloud their judgement, so too can being a Stark-anathema zealot.

For me, the truth will fall in the grey area in between.

[Joe Pine]

It may not have been quite so blatant as that, but something of that nature provides an explanation for the remark about Southron ambitions, if those ambitions were not merely a matter of marrying well but of involvement in plotting to depose or at least bridle the Targaryens - in other word the Game of Thrones, begun long before the first book opens.

I think that takes us back to the Maester at Winterfell, the Southron Ambitions were created by Rickard, Brandon and Maester Walys and there was a chance that if sickly Elia did die, then to have Lyanna interest Rhaegar after her 'introduction' at the Tourney might be an additional opportunity.

The scheming then fell out of their control. It explains Ned's staying in the North after tge rebellion and having nothing to do with the affairs of the throne.

[The Snowfyre Chorus]

I sure hope not. They were still raised from (her) birth as siblings, so that would still be a really gross relationship, in my opinion. Also, if the payoff after seven books is "Hey guys, remember all of that 'Promise me' stuff, and the uncertainty around Robert's Rebellion? Well, Surprise! Jon gets to fuck Arya!" then... well, honestly, I'd prefer the cliche options. :mellow:

Agreed. And I'm more than convinced the Jon-Arya romance was long ago squelched, as GRRM developed a more plausible, and more palatable, story for publication. Honestly, I find the 1993 letter much more limited in its value-for-narrative-analysis than recent Heresy discussions would suggest. Is it interesting? Yes, very. Relevant? I'm not fully convinced.

[Voice]

In Braavos she's growing up and we have hints that she's going to end up returning by way of Eastwatch so its far too premature at this moment to say that GRRM has abandoned this particular storyline from the synopsis, far less devised a different reason for keeping Jon's mother a secret.

Sounds like wishful thinking to me, and some selective reading of the 1993 letter. Arya might return to Westeros, but you can't deny that their passion has not tormented Jon and Arya throughout the "trilogy."

It is in this paragraph we find some of the largest alterations of the story (plausible/published events marked in black bold, alterations in red bold, yet-to-be-seen events in italics):

Jon Snow, the bastard, will remain in the far north. He will mature into a ranger of great daring, and ultimately will succeed his uncle as the commander of the Night's Watch. When Winterfell burns, Catelyn Stark will be forced to flee north with her son Bran and her daughter Arya. Hounded by Lannister riders, they will seek refuge at the Wall, but the men of the Night's Watch give up their families when they take the black, and Jon and Benjen will not be able to help, to Jon's anguish. It will lead to a bitter estrangement between Jon and Bran. Arya will be more forgiving... until she realizes, with terror, that she has fallen in love with Jon, who is not only her half-brother but a man of the Night's Watch, sworn to celibacy. Their passion will continue to torment Jon and Arya throughout the trilogy, until the secret of Jon's true parentage is finally revealed in the last book.

Of the two italicized phrases, the latter seems far more likely to happen than the prior.

[Joe Pine]

I sure hope not. They were still raised from (her) birth as siblings, so that would still be a really gross relationship, in my opinion. Also, if the payoff after seven books is "Hey guys, remember all of that 'Promise me' stuff, and the uncertainty around Robert's Rebellion? Well, Surprise! Jon gets to fuck Arya!" then... well, honestly, I'd prefer the cliche options. :mellow:

I agree. I wouldn't see Jon shagging Arya as a particular thing to look forward to as a conclusion.

On the 'Promise me' stuff we need a better pay off than just 'oh look it's RL=J, preferably something that makes sense of the Daynes, the ToJ stand off, Rhaegar's 'kidnap' of Lyanna and the whole fAegon/Dany as Targaryen heir stuff.

[MaesterSam]

I largely agree with the de-emphasis on Targdom, but we know the tale grew since 1993. I don't think anyone believes this is the story of Stark v Lannister any longer. And it is telling that even in the letter, the reveal of Jon's parentage is mentioned as a matter of import:

Their passion will continue to torment Jon and Arya throughout the trilogy, until the secret of Jon's true parentage is finally revealed in the last book.

If we parse this out, the verbiage after the comma strongly suggests this is an important element of the story.

Before the comma, we know the context has changed quite a bit, as Jon is no longer in a love triangle with Arya. Yet, GRRM kept Jon's parentage as a mystery to be revealed at the end of the series. This makes no sense to do if it is only tangential information.

The reason I think it matters is because, when we learn about Jon's parents, we will learn many other important things in the process, such as what really started RR, why the tourney was held at HH, possibly what's on the Isle of Faces, where were they all this time, etc. Given how much it comes up despite being 17 years ago, RR is clearly significant- and not just b/c it resulted in a new dynasty on the IT. Learning about R and L (even if they turn out to be two separate stories) will reveal many of the other mysteries of the series, which will explain how we got to the present situation. So I do think it will be a big deal, but not b/c it means Jon can now ride a dragon.

Quite. We need to bear in mind that although the series has stretched and otherwise expanded to fill the infamous five year gap we can't really have Jon and Arya being tormented by their feelings for each other until they and in particular she is growed up sufficiently to have those feelings. When she and Jon last saw each other she was still a skinny little tomboy. In Braavos she's growing up and we have hints that she's going to end up returning by way of Eastwatch so its far too premature at this moment to say that GRRM has abandoned this particular storyline from the synopsis, far less devised a different reason for keeping Jon's mother a secret.

I agree, the love story is not dead yet. And I see Arya's WoW chapter as designed to show us that she is growing up and discovering her womanhood. Sure, she sees it first and foremost as a weapon, but still... Maybe he figures if we see her getting it on with some other people first, we'll forget she's 12 (or 13 now? That would be Dany's age when she married Drogo) and be more ok with her and Jon?

I agree up to a point in that I don't believe Ned was directly responsible for her death, but rather that it may have been the family involvement and in particular what his father and elder brother were up to in an undeclared rivalry with the Lannisters in whatever Rhaegar was up to which got her killed and left him to pick up the bits.

Fair enough. It's quite likely that Lyanna was an accidental casualty in the power struggle between the various families. Politics, not love, ultimately led to her death.

I have a hard time deciding whether to see Rhaegar as a player or a piece. It kind of wouldn't surprise me if we learned he was being manipulated throughout much of the events leading to (and the early months of) RR.

[Matthew.]

Is he going to go all 5th element and stuff and stand between factions to forge a convergence that.....sigh i'm getting a headache. You see where u'm going with this?

I don't know about this happening in the magical sense, but in terms of practical social alliances, Jon could accomplish many of the things proposed in that WoW synopsis. He can bring maester and greenseer together, through Sam and Bran; he can bring Wolf and Lion together through his connection with Tyrion. He has Sansa in the Vale, seemingly being set up to become the leader of the Riverlands, the Vale, and the North. And, of course, he's made a good impression on at least some of the Free Folk.

I admit, him acting as a unifying figure is still pretty cliche, but unless all of this is leading up to Westeros being destroyed, someone has to get the realm to pull their heads out of their asses. I think he's made a good start by trying to incorporate the Free Folk into the realm, and even brokering a marriage between Alys and the new Magnar of Thenn.

[wolfmaid7]

And now that Jon and Arya are not an item of concern, why does it remain a mystery, withheld for the end of the series? It doesn't make sense to do that anymore, if is doesn't have any bearing on the overall story...

Actually we don't know that Jon and Arya won't be a thing.In a world where assassins change faces and individuals and glamours abounds "accidents" can happen.Check it,i can see Arya and Jon within the context of some supernatural situation like a glamour of a face change sleeping together.Being totally ashamedguilt ridden etc about it until it is revealed that they are'nt brother and sister lifting the shame of their act.Not saying it will happen only that it could happen.

Other than that and what i've said frequently,while no small folf would give a danm about Jon's parentage i can see it being used to be a spoke in the wheel for other claimants,or something along with Robb's Will or not that could be used to cause more internal conflict for Jon.Especially if he's having to deal with the particulars of his conception.

Can we? I don't think it's that simple to be honest.

The synopsis gives us the broad strokes. Those broad strokes remain relevant in the telling of the tale as published, but the letter does nothing for our understanding of these fine details, like the mystery of Jon's parentage....except of course, the revelation that it is a "secret" to be "revealed in the last book."

That wording sounds far more significant than some are making it out to be. Granted, the RLJ crowd have made far too much of it, which I'll get to, but I think we are very much mistaken to make light of the "secret of Jon's true parentage."

I agree with you most here and to clarify i think the secret of Jon's parentage isn't trivial as i pointed out above i think on a political level and a personal one it will come into play.When it comes to resolving what is happening to the realm on a supernatural level....No

Lyanna is only half of that secret. Her contribution alone to Jon's DNA does not satisfy the import of saving the reveal for the final book, in either the 1993 letter, or in the tale-grown.

I'm not denying this this.

Precisely. Who will it matter to if Jon is Lyanna's son? Lyanna might be the face of the rebellion, but other than that, she's already served her purpose in the story. She doesn't matter anymore.

Every reader already believes Jon to be a son of a Stark, and to have Stark blood flowing in his veins. Lyanna does absolutely nothing to enhance his ancestry, nor the story. So why save that for the last book?

Now of course, if she's revealed to be sitting under WF's heart tree, that's a whole other ballgame, but until then... ;)

I don't think Lyanna has finished serving her purpose in the story,i don't think his dad is either.I feel confident that she will turn out to be Jon's grey lady and whoever the father is name will be used politically.Magic in this tale flows through the matriarchial line while the patriarcial always have politics and that intrigue attached to it.

The deception has always been two-fold. As Tyrion reveals, "some woman" was probably his mother. But is it isn't because of her we meet Jon.

For the general readership, he has been included as a character in the series because he is the Lord Eddard Stark's bastard. Readers will continue to believe so, and Jon will continue to illustrate the inner-torment of his loyalty (love) for House Stark (Arya) while still fulfilling his duty (NW) "until the secret of Jon's true parentage is finally revealed in the last book."

I read it differently ofcourse

I do :)

And no. That is where the RLJ crowd goes too far. But just as being Targaryen-messiah zealots tends to cloud their judgement, so too can being a Stark-anathema zealot.

For me, the truth will fall in the grey area in between.

To me it falls and pegs on Jon claiming himself......Snow.

[wolfmaid7]

I don't know about this happening in the magical sense, but in terms of practical social alliances, Jon could accomplish many of the things proposed in that WoW synopsis. He can bring maester and greenseer together, through Sam and Bran; he can bring Wolf and Lion together through his connection with Tyrion. He has Sansa in the Vale, seemingly being set up to become the leader of the Riverlands, the Vale, and the North. And, of course, he's made a good impression on at least some of the Free Folk.

I admit, him acting as a unifying figure is still pretty cliche, but unless all of this is leading up to Westeros being destroyed, someone has to get the realm to pull their heads out of their asses. I think he's made a good start by trying to incorporate the Free Folk into the realm, and even brokering a marriage between Alys and the new Magnar of Thenn.

I think this is where i differ a bit i don't see Jon as a unifying force and let me explain. Order can emerge from order and it can emerge from chaos. I believe Jon is a chaos factor.So he's not the only factor one of Everyting about him screams the path of the Morrigan. Wolf and Raven and the very strong "ice and death" motif that envelops him.The only way he brings order is by embracing chaos,embracing "ice".Which means he'snot going to get no glory for what he accomplishes and he will look like the bad guy.

I definitely think there is a reason for him and Tyrion forging that friendship just as i think there is a reason for Sam heading to the citadel,but ultimately Jon doesn't belong in the world of men.