Heresy 161

[JNR]

Given that there are not enough books/time left for Jon to sleep with the eleven year old who he thinks of as his little sister (sorry BC), yet, the secret of Jon's true parentage has been kept as a plot device, and saved to finally revealed in the last book, I think this lends RLJ even more weight, rather than less.

It shows that in Oct 93, GRRM planned to make Jon's parents something other than "Eddard Stark + some woman" in such a way that Jon could pursue his tormented passion with Arya after all.

Now, if R+L=J were the only possible alternative, the above would lend weight to that theory. But it's not.

The unreliable narrator argument is directed squarely at Addicted to Whomping Weirwoods, who kept pounding that point many, many heresies ago regarding Craster's mother/daughter/sister wives.

It's never been show why Craster's wife thinks and says what she does.

What we do know is that Sam never bothers to pass it on to Jon, despite knowing for sure that Jon is desperate for info on the Popsicles.

As Wolfmaid and I and others have also suggested, it's hard to imagine that Craster is very knowledgeable about the Popsicles if he thinks they're interested in sheep. If the wives just accept and believe that tidbit too, as they seem to, it doesn't speak well for their analytical powers.

[Voice]

It shows that in Oct 93, GRRM planned to make Jon's parents something other than "Eddard Stark + some woman" in such a way that Jon could pursue his tormented passion with Arya after all.

Now, if R+L=J were the only possible alternative, the above would lend weight to that theory. But it's not.

Indeed. I don't disagree. I'd say it lends weight to any theory that doesn't list Ned as his father. Of those, RLJ remains a very viable possibility. And, it's one which would satisfy the continued need to save the reveal for the end of the series.

[Black Crow]

Indeed. I don't disagree. I'd say it lends weight to any theory that doesn't list Ned as his father. Of those, RLJ remains a very viable possibility. And, it's one which would satisfy the continued need to save the reveal for the end of the series.

Not necessarily. Despite your misgivings about their relative ages the relationship between Jon and Arya is indisputably there in black and white [to coin a phrase] and evidently it is the incest rather than their years which is the stumbling block. The point, on which JNR and I appears to be agreed, is that this is sufficient in itself to justify the mystery and its resolution without requiring Jon to be a Targaryen pretender - especially with Danaerys the Dragonlord already parking her bum on the Iron Throne and doing the Prince that was Promised thing. Taking away that assumption allows for a more measured approach to the question of Jon's real father.

[WeaselPie]

Sorry, despite cousin-marriage being a thing in the novels, I just can't see GRRM choosing this as his denouement to the Jon parentage question and the resolution of J/A's passionate torment.

"I know, I'll make them cousins! Totally cool!"

Kind of a yawn. I admit I've come around to Jon being a Stark, but it's still a major yawn of a resolution. Maybe that's what he has planned but it's still an eye-roller. IMO.

[Matthew.]

Sorry, but if I had a choice between "Surprise! Jon's eligible to be king of Westeros" vs. "Surprise! Jon gets to fuck his super young cousin!," I'll just go ahead and take the secret heir trope.

Fortunately, I think neither is the case, and that whatever the mystery of his parentage turns out to be, it's going to be something relevant to the Ice/Fire thing, rather than the question of the Iron Throne.

[WeaselPie]

Sorry, but if I had a choice between "Surprise! Jon's eligible to be king of Westeros" vs. "Surprise! Jon gets to fuck his super young cousin!," I'll just go ahead and take the secret heir trope.

Fortunately, I think neither is the case, and that whatever the mystery of his parentage turns out to be, it's going to be something relevant to the Ice/Fire thing, rather than the question of the Iron Throne.

Why are we apologizing, lol

I know, I know, I started it....

[Black Crow]

Sorry, despite cousin-marriage being a thing in the novels, I just can't see GRRM choosing this as his denouement to the Jon parentage question and the resolution of J/A's passionate torment.

"I know, I'll make them cousins! Totally cool!"

Kind of a yawn. I admit I've come around to Jon being a Stark, but it's still a major yawn of a resolution. Maybe that's what he has planned but it's still an eye-roller. IMO.

It may indeed turn out to be a bit of a yawn, but that's why I referred to it as a monster in that the R+L=J theory has heightened expectations of the outcome way beyond its actual importance in the story thus far.

[WeaselPie]

It may indeed turn out to be a bit of a yawn, but that's why I referred to it as a monster in that the R+L=J theory has heightened expectations of the outcome way beyond its actual importance in the story thus far.

agreed, of course

There may be more important "inheritable legacies" in the books than the Iron Throne. (pretty sure you can agree BC, although we might somewhat disagree what that will be).

[wolfmaid7]

I'm very much inclined to think that its a monster which formed no part of GRRM's original plan and that it was indeed no more than a plot device of local importance to the Stark family. That's not to say that its only about Jon Snow getting inside Arya Stark's knickers - there may be other consequences in regards to Winterfell, but as GRRM makes very plain at the beginning this is about the Starks and the Lannisters, with Danaerys the Dragonlord taking care of the Targaryen side and perhaps the kingdom as well.

Where the monster comes in is that what started out as a theory that R+L=J has in some quarters taken over the whole damn story in a way that GRRM neither intended nor anticipated. An undoubted but minor plot device has grown to become the central mystery around which everything revolves in spite of its near total absence from the synopsis.

I agree and disagree with this a bit. I think Jon's parentage will be important the thing is important how.Magically,politicaly,personally these are all things to consider.Where i think the problem lies is in the R+L=J becoming the default theory by which everything is built and measured against.A theory which is built on elements that are indispute themselves,being used as proof by which to draw a conclusion in dispute and uses disputable elements to argue based upon is going to have problems and this is where we are at. I challenge anyone to go to RJL V1 and se how that came about and then come back and tell me if its not built on sand.

Given that there are not enough books/time left for Jon to sleep with the eleven year old who he thinks of as his little sister (sorry BC), yet, the secret of Jon's true parentage has been kept as a plot device, and saved to finally revealed in the last book, I think this lends RLJ even more weight, rather than less.

Clearly, Jon's parentage was always something GRRM considered important enough to save for the end of the series...even in 1993...as part of his original plan. And, I think it's clear to many here that the secret is no longer being reserved so that Jon can bed his little sister. So, it must be reserved now for some other purpose, important enough to warrant its reservation for the end of the series... Else, why delay it?

While in 1993 that purpose was merely of personal romantic interest to Jon, now, it no longer is. Yet it remains a secret to be revealed at the end of the series. That is telling.

Disclaimer: I'm not one of the faithful. I would love for there to be more going on than simply Rhaegar and Lyanna, but at this point so late in the game, we have precious few viable alternatives. I would much rather Howland Reed be his father, truth be told. But even that doesn't seem very likely to me. I think the most Howland has going for him are Parris' comment that George doesn't do simple, tKotLT story, and the parallel set up by LF's duel for Cat. But, that's quite thin.

There's an obscene amount of quotes heralding the RLJ connection in another place. While some of them are hilariously tangential, many more are not. It is hard to say it simply "isn't a thing..." or "isn't important..." in these books.

It is. The secret was important enough to save for the end of the "trilogy" in 1993. It's important enough to save for the final 2 books in the 7 part series today. The references exist, I'll not repeat them. I'd rather Bran be traveling with Jon's real half-siblings, but I'll not close my eyes to inconvenient truths....

Noooooo it actually lends credence to any viable theory regarding Jon's parentage and there you go using RLJ as the default.That theory is flawed badly because it is built on flawed elements.From the Rose symbolism,to the TOJ analysis to Rhaegar and Lya being in love to timeline .The reference text exist to Rhaegar,AerysHowland and Arthur Dayne but who

But i think your are right in its importance as a plot device,its just figuring out which baby daddy suits the plot better.

It shows that in Oct 93, GRRM planned to make Jon's parents something other than "Eddard Stark + some woman" in such a way that Jon could pursue his tormented passion with Arya after all.

Now, if R+L=J were the only possible alternative, the above would lend weight to that theory. But it's not

It's never been show why Craster's wife thinks and says what she does.

What we do know is that Sam never bothers to pass it on to Jon, despite knowing for sure that Jon is desperate for info on the Popsicles.

As Wolfmaid and I and others have also suggested, it's hard to imagine that Craster is very knowledgeable about the Popsicles if he thinks they're interested in sheep. If the wives just accept and believe that tidbit too, as they seem to, it doesn't speak well for their analytical powers.

Agreed! And i think this theory has become so emgrained that no one is even willing to put their alternatives in full and i think that has alot to do with the instant abuse directed starting with "not this again." there's already an inherent bias among the board.I would love to see FFR theory in full because i find it beautiful and actually very plausible.

Indeed. I don't disagree. I'd say it lends weight to any theory that doesn't list Ned as his father. Of those, RLJ remains a very viable possibility. And, it's one which would satisfy the continued need to save the reveal for the end of the series.

True,it is viable among a couple viables and even less than some of those.

[ummester]

I'm very much inclined to think that its a monster which formed no part of GRRM's original plan and that it was indeed no more than a plot device of local importance to the Stark family. That's not to say that its only about Jon Snow getting inside Arya Stark's knickers - there may be other consequences in regards to Winterfell, but as GRRM makes very plain at the beginning this is about the Starks and the Lannisters, with Danaerys the Dragonlord taking care of the Targaryen side and perhaps the kingdom as well.

Where the monster comes in is that what started out as a theory that R+L=J has in some quarters taken over the whole damn story in a way that GRRM neither intended nor anticipated. An undoubted but minor plot device has grown to become the central mystery around which everything revolves in spite of its near total absence from the synopsis.

That 'who is Jon's mother?' is also the question GRRM asked D & D, to see if they'd been paying attention, has no doubt helped amplify it's importance even more. GRRM didn't state that that question was the important puzzle that the story hinges on when he asked it, as far as I know.

Meh, I'm starting to think GRRM is less interested in plans, including his, than most give him credit for. I'm starting to think ASoIaF has a lot more whimsy than fans realize.

[Voice]

Not necessarily. Despite your misgivings about their relative ages the relationship between Jon and Arya is indisputably there in black and white [to coin a phrase] and evidently it is the incest rather than their years which is the stumbling block. The point, on which JNR and I appears to be agreed, is that this is sufficient in itself to justify the mystery and its resolution without requiring Jon to be a Targaryen pretender - especially with Danaerys the Dragonlord already parking her bum on the Iron Throne and doing the Prince that was Promised thing. Taking away that assumption allows for a more measured approach to the question of Jon's real father.

I agree with much of what you said here BC. But facts are facts. Arya is 11. From the way the synopsis was worded, and given it was written in the days when GRRM still planned to use the 5-year gap... it seems she was going to be far older in the original storyline. Things have changed. I don't think Jon being a Targ pretender is the end-all be-all in the series. But, I think at this point, RLJ is a much more viable resolution of Jon's parentage than Jon+Arya.

[Voice]

Sorry, but if I had a choice between "Surprise! Jon's eligible to be king of Westeros" vs. "Surprise! Jon gets to fuck his super young cousin!," I'll just go ahead and take the secret heir trope.

Fortunately, I think neither is the case, and that whatever the mystery of his parentage turns out to be, it's going to be something relevant to the Ice/Fire thing, rather than the question of the Iron Throne.

Precisely my point. Thanks again for putting it more succinctly. Perhaps I should refer people to you when arguing with me... LOL

Why are we apologizing, lol

I know, I know, I started it....

Hey without debates, Heresy feels like a certain other place...

[Voice]

Noooooo it actually lends credence to any viable theory regarding Jon's parentage and there you go using RLJ as the default.That theory is flawed badly because it is built on flawed elements.From the Rose symbolism,to the TOJ analysis to Rhaegar and Lya being in love to timeline .The reference text exist to Rhaegar,AerysHowland and Arthur Dayne but who

But i think your are right in its importance as a plot device,its just figuring out which baby daddy suits the plot better.

True. It lends credibility to any theory where Ned is not the father. But of those, RLJ is the most supported by the text alone. Believe me, I've done a J=/=R+L re-read, and no other candidates present themselves. I'd rather it not be so, but I am open-minded enough on the matter to not exclude the possibility, simply because I don't want it to be so.

And honestly, some of the alternatives seem to be just that... a biased preference to not want to accept evidence for RLJ. And that's fine. I don't have a dog in the fight, so it makes no matter either way. Lyanna being his mother is enough for me. But I think it takes a great deal of squinting with thumbs in your ears to not pick up on the RLJ connection.

The best argument against RLJ, which the faithful despise, is that it's too easy. I'm in that camp. But, as no other candidates readily present themselves, I'm content to think Rhaegar may be the father until Lyanna is linked in a relationship with anyone else. To this point, she isn't.

True,it is viable among a couple viables and even less than some of those.

What theory is more viable as to Jon's parentage than RLJ?

We've tossed around quite a few. And of those I'd say none have the legs to stand on that RLJ does. And that's coming from a Howland+Lyanna fanboy! LOL

Meh, I'm starting to think GRRM is less interested in plans, including his, than most give him credit for. I'm starting to think ASoIaF has a lot more whimsy than fans realize.

We've seen hints of this in his interviews actually. He tends to take it as seriously as his fans, up to a point, then they/we take it a little too far, he tends to laugh them/us off. He knows it's his crowning achievement within a large volume of his life's work, but he also knows it isn't his life.

While he takes the writing process itself extremely seriously, we take the content far more seriously than he does.

[Urrax2]

...I would love to see FFR theory in full ...

I'm slow today. What's FFR?

[Voice]

I'm slow today. What's FFR?

Frey family reunion... must be lurking today....

[Black Crow]

I agree and disagree with this a bit. I think Jon's parentage will be important the thing is important how.Magically,politicaly,personally these are all things to consider.Where i think the problem lies is in the R+L=J becoming the default theory by which everything is built and measured against.A theory which is built on elements that are indispute themselves,being used as proof by which to draw a conclusion in dispute and uses disputable elements to argue based upon is going to have problems and this is where we are at. I challenge anyone to go to RJL V1 and se how that came about and then come back and tell me if its not built on sand.

Ah, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it won't be important. What I am saying is that this story was built to encompass five story arcs, not one, and that the R+L=J monster is tending towards there must be One - a Hero will Arise - etc etc..

[Voice]

Ah, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it won't be important. What I am saying is that this story was built to encompass five story arcs, not one, and that the R+L=J monster is tending towards there must be One - a Hero will Arise - etc etc..

Agreed. Though I'm of the mind Jon will be present and important in the climactic battle, from the "true threat." ...And, that there will be a climactic battle, of course :)

[Black Crow]

What theory is more viable as to Jon's parentage than RLJ?

We've tossed around quite a few. And of those I'd say none have the legs to stand on that RLJ does. And that's coming from a Howland+Lyanna fanboy! LOL

Au contraire, as we've recently discussed Ser Arthur Dayne actually has more going for him than Rhaegar. He has just as much opportunity and is spoken of repeatedly and with far more open respect by Lord Eddard. For instance when he does think of Rhaegar its that almost sour comment that he doubted Rhaegar ever frequented brothels and he also realises that he hasn't thought of him in years, while by contrast the Stark kids remember him telling them more than once of Ser Arthur the parfait knight. Then there's the funny business of the magic sword and of Starfall and the business of it only being drawn from the stone by the one destined to wield it.

Its not a perfect theory, but nor is R+L=J, and it requires far fewer gymnastics.

As to GRRM he's certainly encouraged speculation with his gnomic responses and probably gets a good laugh out of it because the longer and louder people go chasing after R+L=J the less likely they are to tumble to the less obvious A+L=J.

[wolfmaid7]

True. It lends credibility to any theory where Ned is not the father. But of those, RLJ is the most supported by the text alone. Believe me, I've done a J=/=R+L re-read, and no other candidates present themselves. I'd rather it not be so, but I am open-minded enough on the matter to not exclude the possibility, simply because I don't want it to be so.

And honestly, some of the alternatives seem to be just that... a biased preference to not want to accept evidence for RLJ. And that's fine. I don't have a dog in the fight, so it makes no matter either way. Lyanna being his mother is enough for me. But I think it takes a great deal of squinting with thumbs in your ears to not pick up on the RLJ connection.

The best argument against RLJ, which the faithful despise, is that it's too easy. I'm in that camp. But, as no other candidates readily present themselves, I'm content to think Rhaegar may be the father until Lyanna is linked in a relationship with anyone else. To this point, she isn't.

What theory is more viable as to Jon's parentage than RLJ?

We've tossed around quite a few. And of those I'd say none have the legs to stand on that RLJ does. And that's coming from a Howland+Lyanna fanboy! LOL

We've seen hints of this in his interviews actually. He tends to take it as seriously as his fans, up to a point, then they/we take it a little too far, he tends to laugh them/us off. He knows it's his crowning achievement within a large volume of his life's work, but he also knows it isn't his life.

While he takes the writing process itself extremely seriously, we take the content far more seriously than he does.

Ah, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it won't be important. What I am saying is that this story was built to encompass five story arcs, not one, and that the R+L=J monster is tending towards there must be One - a Hero will Arise - etc etc..

I biased preference to not want to accept RJL? Really? That in itself is biased.I for a long time supported this theory, because it jumped out instantly and superficially. I'missed ok with it being true or not true because to me Jon's path lays in maintaining his bastard status.But if I were to look deeper at RLJ from where I sit it is built on the perception characters in the story have surrounding the events of the Tourney and Lyanna's missing year.

Let me switch it on you a bit.Specifically as you say what solidifies this theory for you? I want to do an exercise not only in perception, but in an alternative as well let's say using Robert Baratheon as the father.

[Black Crow]

Agreed. Though I'm of the mind Jon will be present and important in the climactic battle, from the "true threat." ...And, that there will be a climactic battle, of course :)

Oh I've no doubt as to both - they are in the synopsis; but with regard to the question of identity, Jon as a son of Winterfell can embrace a possible identity as Son of the Morning far more convincingly than finding himself a Dragonlord