Jon & Arya - hints and overall significance of their relationship (including part 3)

[lojzelote]

The game does not stop for the apocalypse. The game does not stop for any reason. And if mankind perishes it will be picked up by cockroaches.

I have very little doubt in my mind that the Others will have willing collaborators, through both ambition and fear, some will try to keep their tails out of it, some will fight over the best way to fight the Others, some will lump wargs, northmen and wildlings along with the Others and fight everyone and even those who are fighting the other will keep half an eye on gaining an edge for when the whole affair ends.

The Others are probably scheming against one another over who gets the freshest wights, or who has the nicest icicle.

:agree: Human nature won't ever change.

P.S.: Thank you for the links, Ice Turtle.

[LadyBee]

The game does not stop for the apocalypse. The game does not stop for any reason. And if mankind perishes it will be picked up by cockroaches.

I have very little doubt in my mind that the Others will have willing collaborators, through both ambition and fear, some will try to keep their tails out of it, some will fight over the best way to fight the Others, some will lump wargs, northmen and wildlings along with the Others and fight everyone and even those who are fighting the other will keep half an eye on gaining an edge for when the whole affair ends.

The Others are probably scheming against one another over who gets the freshest wights, or who has the nicest icicle.

:agree:

That's pretty much what I think. It even reminds me of Syrio Forel saying that battles are fought in chaos. The game of thrones have been a constant component of the plot so far, to ignore it completely would make little sense given everything that we have in the story so far.

[The Ned's Little Girl]

I didn't meant it as an insult, but I really find it confusing when people use these arguments to justify why this or that event shouldn't happen in the book when similar situations had already happened.

Oh I don't think at all that you meant an insult (and I hope you don't think I was insulted, because I was not. I was a tiny bit irritated, but not at you). Also I didn't notice that that was your first post. I should have said "Welcome to the forums!" I'll say it now: Welcome!

Many times here, people have argued that "you shouldn't judge characters in the story by our values, you should judge them by their values", which I think is hogwash and I do get irritated by being told which values I should espouse when judging a novel. I can judge fictional characters by any standards I choose and it's nobody else's business if I do.

With regard to a future romance between Jon and Arya, I don't really have a problem with cousins marrying in Westeros. I do have a problem with these cousins marrying. They have regarded each other as siblings for all of their lives (well, all of Arya's life anyway). I just don't see that the habit of their lifetimes can be shrugged off just like that once they find out they're actually cousins instead of siblings; I don't think people's minds work that way. That is what makes it incest to me, not them being cousins.

It feels to me that it would be contrived and forced if GRRM ends up including a romantic relationship between Jon and Arya.

[LadyBee]

Thanks for welcoming me ^^.

As for your answer, specially the way you feel about the possibility of a relationship between Jon and Arya and your argument that they grew up believing to be siblings, I have to disagree, based on the books.

At the first book we are introduced to a couple that are actually siblings and they have an affair (started when they were about 7-8 years old which is even more disturbing) and 3 kids. I can't say for sure why Cersei and Jaime Lannister where introduced to us as lovers (making Jeoffrey, Myrcella and Tommen bastards could have been done in another way). Why an incestuous relationship? Only Martin could answer this question, but it's rather curious.

Besides, there's the whole Targaryen thematic. Incestuous relationships are mentioned every time in the books, some of them are forced upon a couple, and some are not (taking Aemon The Dragon Knight and Queen Naerys for an example). I don't say that it's something that anyone should take lightly, but during the reading of the books the taboo about it loses a bit of it's strength given the occurrence of other shocking events.

I don't know if you ever googled the tag "incest" (not the porn thing, the actual relationship). I have done it for research and what I found was many testimonies of people that lived the experience. In cases where the relationship was between siblings, they either grew apart or lived apart for a few years and although some of the episodes occurred a while ago it's something that torment them not only because of the moral issue, but also because some are still in love. I can try to find the links, but most of the sites were in Portuguese.

I really can't say why incestuous relationships exist or what drives a person to engage in one, but they eventually happen. Although it's something that I find shocking, I'm more interested in understand the "why". So far an eventual romance between Jon and Arya would have some serious basis to occur, it would shock me much more if it was something out of nowhere like the idea of Jon and Sansa (sorry I just don't understand this paring).

[Meemaw]

After a reread its clear the clues have been there in front of our faces but ignored because of the ick factor.

[ShadowCat Rivers]

Well, I don't think that they'll stop all conflict and 'united all together will fight the good fight' either, but I also don't think that it will be the time (especially for Jon) to push any blood claims or that the northmen, or the riverfolk for examble, will give a shit about who sits the iron throne and stuff like that. The "game" will have to take a different form, more primitive I would guess, as it will be, quite literally, about who eats and who gets eaten.

In that sense, I think that a lot of conventions of the sort that would make a political marriage really necessary 'before', will be rendered obsolete under the new realities.

[lojzelote]

Well, the North will need all the help it can get. Particularly if Dany's vision of the Others at the Trident holds true; because either they've overran the North first or they have gone around through the sea and probably cut it off at the Neck.

[The Sleeper]

Well, I don't think that they'll stop all conflict and 'united all together will fight the good fight' either, but I also don't think that it will be the time (especially for Jon) to push any blood claims or that the northmen, or the riverfolk for examble, will give a shit about who sits the iron throne and stuff like that. The "game" will have to take a different form, more primitive I would guess, as it will be, quite literally, about who eats and who gets eaten.

In that sense, I think that a lot of conventions of the sort that would make a political marriage really necessary 'before', will be rendered obsolete under the new realities.

Oh, I wasn't speaking about Jon or Arya in particular, just making a general observation about politics taking a backstage in the narrative. As for Jon, I doubt his heritage will amount to anything, not the least considering that the IT is functionally defunct already at this stage in the story. I'm thinking that he will find himself in a position of de facto leadership, because he is the guy who is keeping an eye on this thing and there is a growing power vacuum.

As for the game I believe it will become more chaotic and fast, but will move along the familiar lines. As for Arya becoming politically relevant again, it depends where in Westeros she lands and under what conditions. Or she may come across Dany in Essos and the latter uses her as a figurehead to garner support in the riverlands and/or the north.

[Greymoon]

Viserys is authority on nothing. He himself wanted Dany. Tyrion disliked the thought but still got an erection looking at a 12 y.o Sansa??? You're saying that you have no problem combining these two things?

My fantasy is one of 10 different scenarios that I already posted where Jon and Arya can be together on this and that other Jon/Arya thread. (and again I do not want them to be together like that) Just because you or me or anyone else find the thought of them Yuk (to quote another user from this thread) it doesn't mean George will not go there. He was more than willing when he conceived the books. The point is that there are so many different variables still at play that it's impossible for us to know where he'll take his work and his characters. All that we can do is analyze the published material and unexpected gifts like the leaked outline. And how they may still relate. People so stuck in their views come in and clamor how the outline is completely different than the published work, but as we look at it closely we see that it is not true. The bare bones of events are still more or less there. Tyrion didn't burn Winterfell, but it still got burned. Arya did not come to the Wall herself, but her proxy Alys did...etc. Jon and Arya together was the big romance of the books according to the outline and we really should search for clues and analyze their relationship so far to see if there is a possibility for George to go there.

And you are completely missing the point when you accuse the users here to be paedo supporters just because they try to do so (analyze the text). Not one user implied that Jon wants to go there right now in his life and fuck his 9 year old sister. No one. Yet when attacking people for analyzing the text this is what you and some others resort to.

I was mostly sarcastic with my last post because focusing on the current age of the characters and blind accusations of people supporting peados is ridiculous. I was trying to say that age is not an issue for George, Dany was 13 when the story started and already considered an extraordinarily beautiful WOMAN, not a child. Sansa the same. And yes, Juliet was 13. One of the greatest love stories ever written had a 13 year old as the main protagonist. Romeo's age was not specified but it's implied he is older (18 -21).

Greymoon

Love your post!!!

Thanks :) totally agree with your points, too. Regarding customs, especially regarding marriage customs, GRRM has tried as much as possible to set the asoiaf universe in one that is similar to our middle ages giving it a flair of historical authenticity. So aside from 'unconventional' relationships (unconventional in views of our modern moral standards) being a common trope in literature, from Shakespeare to Nabokov and beyond, it is a historical truth that some young girls in the European Middle Age married very young....high born girls especially. And this went on even beyond our Middle Ages.

For most people in Westeros, Arya's age would not be a factor preventing her being married, or even present a potentially disgusting scenario. In fact 'Arya' is already 'officially' married....and regardless of the fact that they grew up as siblings, them being first cousins, makes any potential relationship between Jon and Arya as 'morally acceptable' to people in westeros, too.

What could potential be conceived as problematic by people in Westeros, is that by marrying each other, Jon and Arya would prevent the forging of politically more fruitful alliances. If the war is already won though, this might not be a problem at all -- alternatively, any such marriage could be presented as 'solving' a conflict of interest between Arya's claim to the North, and Jon's (as Robb's declared heir).

[lojzelote]

Poor Bran, Rickon and Sansa.

Oh well, back to the GoT section.

[ShadowCat Rivers]

As for the game I believe it will become more chaotic and fast, but will move along the familiar lines. As for Arya becoming politically relevant again, it depends where in Westeros she lands and under what conditions. Or she may come across Dany in Essos and the latter uses her as a figurehead to garner support in the riverlands and/or the north.

Hmm, I believe it is going to change and the bolded is a prominent examble: why (and, more importantly, how? by what means?) would anyone in the aforementioned areas mobilize for a figurehead? They'll support whoever can feed them, or promises plunder (and can reasonably be expected to win).

IMO it has to shake their way of being, their priorities and their system of believes, otherwise a "business as usual" motif would be anticlimatic, as I see it. In real history, massive wars have changed the involved societies drastically and forever, creating practical necessities that, in turn, affect the societal superstructure. Why would it be different in ASOIAF?

[The Sleeper]

Hmm, I believe it is going to change and the bolded is a prominent examble: why (and, more importantly, how? by what means?) would anyone in the aforementioned areas mobilize for a figurehead? They'll support whoever can feed them, or promises plunder (and can reasonably be expected to win).

IMO it has to shake their way of being, the priorities and their system of believes, as a "business as usual" motif would be anticlimatic, as I see it. In real history, massive wars have changed the involved societies drastically and forever, creating practical necessities that, in turn, affect the societal superstructure. Why would it be different in ASOIAF?

But that would be the sane thing to do, wouldn't it? In large part that would be a factor about who people will rally behind. Yet the things you mention, being able to feed, protect and shelter people relies on being able to organize them and getting people to follow. That hinges on things that aren't necessarily logical, like who has the requisite skills, knowledge and who has the coolest head. Moreover particularly in times of crisis people will look for the familiar, or whoever appears to have the aforementioned qualities. Clinging to the erroneous belief that it is "business as usual" is something people do to cope with a crisis and anyone who can offer a semblance of that will have a higher chance to rally people. Of course it doesn't work and things will look completely different after the storm has passed.

This won't be the only tendency of course. I'm convinced that the faith will gain huge prominence in the future as people will look to the faith to save them, or help them redeem themselves or whatever. I'm pretty sure they will make things worse (they're who I had in mind when I wrote earlier that some will fight everybody else).

Why would they follow a figurehead? Precisely, because they are more likely to believe that the figurehead would feed and protect them and hey, it can work that way because with garnering enough support they can organize their followers and actually be able to provide those things.To paraphrase Varys the illusion of power can have very real results.

[LadyBee]

But that would be the sane thing to do, wouldn't it? In large part that would be a factor about who people will rally behind. Yet the things you mention, being able to feed, protect and shelter people relies on being able to organize them and getting people to follow. That hinges on things that aren't necessarily logical, like who has the requisite skills, knowledge and who has the coolest head. Moreover particularly in times of crisis people will look for the familiar, or whoever appears to have the aforementioned qualities. Clinging to the erroneous belief that it is "business as usual" is something people do to cope with a crisis and anyone who can offer a semblance of that will have a higher chance to rally people. Of course it doesn't work and things will look completely different after the storm has passed.

This won't be the only tendency of course. I'm convinced that the faith will gain huge prominence in the future as people will look to the faith to save them, or help them redeem themselves or whatever. I'm pretty sure they will make things worse (they're who I had in mind when I wrote earlier that some will fight everybody else).

Why would they follow a figurehead? Precisely, because they are more likely to believe that the figurehead would feed and protect them and hey, it can work that way because with garnering enough support they can organize their followers and actually be able to provide those things.To paraphrase Varys the illusion of power can have very real results.

This! :agree:

[AryaNymeriaVisenya]

Thanks :) totally agree with your points, too. Regarding customs, especially regarding marriage customs, GRRM has tried as much as possible to set the asoiaf universe in one that is similar to our middle ages giving it a flair of historical authenticity. So aside from 'unconventional' relationships (unconventional in views of our modern moral standards) being a common trope in literature, from Shakespeare to Nabokov and beyond, it is a historical truth that some young girls in the European Middle Age married very young....high born girls especially. And this went on even beyond our Middle Ages.

For most people in Westeros, Arya's age would not be a factor preventing her being married, or even present a potentially disgusting scenario. In fact 'Arya' is already 'officially' married....and regardless of the fact that they grew up as siblings, them being first cousins, makes any potential relationship between Jon and Arya as 'morally acceptable' to people in westeros, too.

What could potential be conceived as problematic by people in Westeros, is that by marrying each other, Jon and Arya would prevent the forging of politically more fruitful alliances. If the war is already won though, this might not be a problem at all -- alternatively, any such marriage could be presented as 'solving' a conflict of interest between Arya's claim to the North, and Jon's (as Robb's declared heir).

A few pages back I made a post where I think I showed the Stark girls as the best political solution. Not only does it unite two Stark lines as Starks like to do to keep the family lean but it gives Jon alliances in the Vale and the Riverlands through Cat. As he is not Cats son he has no relation to either Lords of those places like Robb did.

Dany suffers from being alone, she has no family and a very tentative hold on the territory she has. She also has already had one stillbirth who was malformed in an inhuman way and believes herself barren. Even if she isn't, is it worth the risk? Her real asset is a dragon but if Jon gets one of them she has little to offer. Marge, Shireen and Arianne do not seem long for this world.

[Aderyn]

I really doubt Jon will find himself ever attracted to Sansa (or Doran ), he has little understanding for passivity.

Doran?? Surely you mean... um... Dany? (although Doran is pretty passive aggressive I grant you that ;) ... and I would probably choose Jon/Doran over Jon/Dany any time now that I think of it lol)

While I enjoyed reading your brilliantly thorough analysis of all five books (I had forgotten how unique Jon and Arya's relationship is compared to other Starks), I'm not sure if I believe in this theory... I have a hard time seeing Jon and Arya getting romantically involved because to me they just clearly spell "brother and sister" (if not biologically then in every other way). Still, I'm not saying your arguments weren't convincing. I actually find myself in a very contradicted and indecisive situation and I'm not sure what to do about it. :P

[lojzelote]

Too bad for Stargaryens, then. I have a gut feeling that Dany will bear a living child, even if it is the last thing she does. But perhaps they will get to be caretakers and teach the child proper Targaryen family values. ;)

[AllOfTheHours]

A few pages back I made a post where I think I showed the Stark girls as the best political solution. Not only does it unite two Stark lines as Starks like to do to keep the family lean but it gives Jon alliances in the Vale and the Riverlands through Cat. As he is not Cats son he has no relation to either Lords of those places like Robb did.

Dany suffers from being alone, she has no family and a very tentative hold on the territory she has. She also has already had one stillbirth who was malformed in an inhuman way and believes herself barren. Even if she isn't, is it worth the risk? Her real asset is a dragon but if Jon gets one of them she has little to offer. Marge, Shireen and Arianne do not seem long for this world.

:agree: I agree about a Jon and Arya (or Sansa) marriage alliance between the Starks. And I agree about Dany.

I think what I am most looking forward to for a Jon and Arya reunion is how they interact. They don't know each other any more and his expectations of her are totally wrong. In ADwD he thinks, "Wherever he might send her, though, Arya would need silver to support

her, a roof above her head, someone to protect her. She was only a child." Arya is far stronger than he could ever have imagined and has gone without silver, a roof over her head or someone to protect her. For all her strength, a part of her is broken and aching too (like when she talks about the emptiness in her chest). As much as Jon has changed through loss and being a leader, he has nothing on the transformation Arya has gone through.

Although Jon/Arya is not my favorite romantic ship, I love their brother-sister relationship and how well they used to connect with each other. So I am curious about how GRRM would/will handle their reunion and the broken dreams and lost identities that have changed them.

[Liz Stark-Targaryen]

With regard to a future romance between Jon and Arya, I don't really have a problem with cousins marrying in Westeros. I do have a problem with these cousins marrying. They have regarded each other as siblings for all of their lives (well, all of Arya's life anyway). I just don't see that the habit of their lifetimes can be shrugged off just like that once they find out they're actually cousins instead of siblings; I don't think people's minds work that way. That is what makes it incest to me, not them being cousins.

It feels to me that it would be contrived and forced if GRRM ends up including a romantic relationship between Jon and Arya.

You've summarized my feelings exactly. It would totally ruin the books for me.

[Ice Turtle]

Doran?? Surely you mean... um... Dany? (although Doran is pretty passive aggressive I grant you that ;) ... and I would probably choose Jon/Doran over Jon/Dany any time now that I think of it lol)

While I enjoyed reading your brilliantly thorough analysis of all five books (I had forgotten how unique Jon and Arya's relationship is compared to other Starks), I'm not sure if I believe in this theory... I have a hard time seeing Jon and Arya getting romantically involved because to me they just clearly spell "brother and sister" (if not biologically then in every other way). Still, I'm not saying your arguments weren't convincing. I actually find myself in a very contradicted and indecisive situation and I'm not sure what to do about it. :P

But Dany is hardly an embodiment of passivity :)

As for what do, sadly, keep waiting and waiting and waiting and then keep reading.

[Aderyn]

But Dany is hardly an embodiment of passivity :)

As for what do, sadly, keep waiting and waiting and waiting and then keep reading.

True :P But at that point I honestly thought you had somehow typoed with Doran LoL... I blame lack of sleep for not being able to tell a typo from a jest...

And I think I will let these two interpretations of Jon and Arya's relationship coexist in my head for now. They don't seem to be in a clash...