Heresy 161

[Voice]

snip

I can totally dig that. It would explain the tourney location, the crown of roses, the presence of the Crannogman, the presence of the Dragon, the presence of the Direwolf, and, provide a nice way to connect Bloodraven to the events he surely witnessed. And, while we're tossing around theoreticals, what if the outright kidnapping of a pregnant Lyanna was a necessary element of the prophecy (ritual, ceremony, etc)? What if kidnapping was required in order for the whole thing to bear fruit? Perhaps, like Rowan Morrison in The Wicker Man, Lyanna was "in" on the whole "kidnapping" thing from the start... Maybe the she-wolf was hunting the red dragon.

By the way Heretics, if any of you haven't seen The Wicker Man, you need to! The Nick Cage version is utter shit, but the original is one of the coolest movies ever made.

[Phillip Frye]

So many statements of absolution.

How long have you been with us, again? Absolutes are his stock-in-trade.

[Voice]

How long have you been with us, again? Absolutes are his stock-in-trade.

Oh! KT meant "absolutes" instead of "absolutions" ...now I get it :) I thought he was going all Catelyn on us :D

[JNR]

Our text, through several POV characters, states quite clearly that they did [have sex]. This includes Stark POVs. I suppose we can dismiss the texts. But then, what are we discussing exactly?

This gets right to the heart of how unreliable narration plays out (or doesn't) in these books.

First, let me ask you this: Is the idea that we're supposed to believe whatever we're told, until it's proven false?

Because in that case, Rhaegar raped Lyanna. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.

This info comes from multiple perspectives, one of which is a Stark (Bran). It's never beeen contradicted. We have zero direct, first-hand information about how they spent their time together (if indeed there was any such time), so it really can't be contradicted.

Yet despite this, most book readers arbitrarily choose to believe there was no rape. OK, I don't have a problem with that, but they should admit that they aren't going about things in a consistent manner.

The way I read these books is a little different: GRRM gives us info in various ways, some of which are far more reliable than others. It's up to us to puzzle it through.

First-hand POV info, based on sensory input or thoughts, is all but undeniable. Ned feels the cold air in the crypts; therefore, they were cold at that time. He hears Robert accuse Rhaegar of raping Lyanna; therefore, Robert really said that.

GRRM also tells his readers many things point-blank in interviews, direct e-mails, at conventions, etc. These remarks too I take as essentially gospel, though he is often evasive and shifty and this should be understood. If he says "Draw your own conclusion" about Syrio being dead, that does not mean Syrio is dead (or alive), but that he is being shifty.

Something like "Rhaegar and Lyanna had sex," on the other hand, seems to have very little foundation at all.

There is no POV observation of such an event. Rhaegar's location or locations in his missing time are not even known. Ditto Lyanna. Nobody claims to have seen them have sex. It is nothing but an idea in Robert's head and Bran's head and God only knows how many fan heads.

But it is not at all something that has been demonstrated to my satisfaction and thus, like Schrodinger's cat, must remain in a state of uncertain quantum flux until such time as GRRM opens the box, in a future book, and gives us a peek inside. We can only note it with a ?, refusing to confirm it, deny it, or build theories on top of it.

[Eira Seren]

Oh! KT meant "absolutes" instead of "absolutions" ...now I get it :) I thought he was going all Catelyn on us :D

Well, we do still have one more week left of Lent.

what if the outright kidnapping of a pregnant Lyanna was a necessary element of the prophecy (ritual, ceremony, etc)? What if kidnapping was required in order for the whole thing to bear fruit?

What if Lyanna wasn't kidnapped? What if she absconded of her own accord? And not necessarily with Rhaegar?

[Black Crow]

We don't know if Rhaegar and Lyanna had sex.

Exactly so - there is no evidence at all other than Robert's fevered imaginings.

[ummester]

I can actually.

We have detailed genealogies for both, Houses Stark and Targaryen, in the World Book. Interesting, isn't it? ...that those are the only two house genealogies included. Hmm...

Considering Targs have only been in Westeros 300 years, and married siblings, it isn't hard to imagine Jon would be the first if he is Rhaegar's son.

Wait a minute

Its not

7. Can you provide any information on the "The Pact of Ice and Fire," mentioned only once in the TWOIAF (pg. 141)? Did you have any discussion about it with George? Was any additional detail about it cut from TWOIAF, as far as you know? Or was there only ever that one sentence?

For space reasons, details around the pact -- particularly certain scurrilous details from one Mushroom, involving Prince Jacaerys allegedly falling in love with and secretly marrying Lord Cregan’s bastard half-sister -- had to be cut. However, the core of it is as it says in the book: Cregan agreed to support Rhaenyra for the promise of a Targaryen bride.

Aren't these 2 replies in conflict? Who is right here?

And, though the genealogies in the world books support the idea, I find the idea kind of ludicrous. Starks have been in Westeros for what, 8000 years? The people in ASoIaF seem to enjoy fucking, as we do and it seems they do a bit of it. Over that 8000 years, Stark blood has probably spread everywhere. The mere concept of pure First Man blood, without inbreeding (like Craster) surviving unblemished for 8000 years seems a stretch. People producing consistently viable offspring after selective or inbreeding for a long period of time also seems a stretch. The the Targs are around for 300 years (and they also seem to like inbreeding and a bit of first in with the bride fucking) and the lines never mixed. No drunken Starks and Targs ever made a baby by mistake in that time? No bastards (from either line) ever went off and knocked each other up for fun?

It's seems strange, irregular - everyone in ASoIaF fucks everyone, all of the time - apart from Targs and Starks?

[Black Crow]

For me, Jon, the bastard of Dayne... or Jon, the bastard of Targaryen, makes no difference. Jon the son of Lyanna is enough to make him important in the final battle.

You misunderstand me. I believe that Jon truly being a son of Winterfell is what's important. Like all of us he needs a biological father as well as his true one [i mean Lord Eddard who brought him up] and that turning him into some kind of Targaryen will detract from that.

[Black Crow]

Thanks for explaining. Your point about his parents in terms of magical stuff is a good one.

I agree too.

[Black Crow]

Re the blood - it's still all kind of fuzzy in ASoIaF.

Targs have a thing with dragons. Starks have a thing with Ice and the north. But you can't tell me that Jon Snow is the first time Targ and Stark blood has ever produced an offspring? The way Targs like taking brides on their wedding nights, there have probably been hundreds of people with Jon Snow's particular combination (if R+L=J) before.

The most notable being Bloodraven, touted as a Targaryen but yet born and brought up a Blackwood of Raventree Hall and currently serving the old gods.

[TheSmallOther]

The more info that I've come across pertaining to Beltane rituals (with a big thanks to Wolfsmaid's own personal experiences) the more I've become convinced that GRRM is referencing a Beltane or Gaelic May Day ritual with the Harrenhal tourney. The Beltane rituals often involve Red Dragons (representing Summer) vs White Dragons (representing winter), and the crowning of the May Queen with the arrival of the Green Man. Kidnappings of the May Queen or the Green Man are also a traditional part of the festivities.

Expanding these seasonal fertility rituals into our story, I think what we're looking at is possibly Rhaegar as the Red Dragon representing Summer battling it out with Brynden Rivers the White Dragon representing winter.

Bloodraven perhaps using his Blackwood accomplice, Walys, arranges the marriage of the male Stark line (in Brandon) to Cat (representing a female line that ran to House Tully from House Whent and probably House Losthon before). My guess is this wasn't a political match but perhaps a genetic match looking to create their winter king (or queen). Apparently Bloodraven believes Bran may fit the bill.

In the meantime Rhaegar is perhaps looking to genetically engineer his answer to Bloodraven's machinations through his Harrenhal tourney. The Beltane rituals always involve a crowning of a May Queen and the arrival of a Green Man. The two are usually paired up in the culmination of a fertility ritual (sometimes with a kidnapping of either the May Queen or the Green Man at some point during the festivities). Perhaps the Harrenhal tourney was specifically held at Harrenhal to get the attention of the Green Men at the Isle of Faces. My guess is Howland plays the part of the Green Man and Lyanna plays thepart of the May Queen. Thus this may be the bloodline that Rhaegar engineers, coupling with the female Stark line with the Reed line to produce their Corn King (Jon and/or Meera?) whose sacrifice is needed to get Westeros past the Long Winter that Bloodraven may be attempting to create through Bran, or Sansa.

Bloodraven lures his creation (Bran) to him through his dreams, while Rhaegar and his cohorts (Connington, Arthur, Oberyn, ect.) just outright kidnap the pregnant Lyanna to try and take custody of her child.

Can we change the May Queen into the Nights Queen? Or Queen of Others? :devil:

It would be funny to find out in the end that RLJ is true, but only as a fact, not as everyone expects (yet_another_Targaryen_rightful_king). In reality there was no love between R and L, only a ritual. During which all KG stood around with hoods on, swords in their hands. Singing, of course. Predicting a future Nights King (Jon Snow) to be born. And yes, KG have swore new vows already and turned themselves to the Dark side :commie:

Anyway, despite how Jon's parentage is going be revealed, I really would like to see him as NK equivalent. The only question that bothers me is "which Stark(s) will have to kill him?". Arya comes to mind first :)

<end of crackpot>

[Black Crow]

I don't see Jon Becoming a dragonlord or as the Sword of the Morning... He is the Night's King... He is the only character in the books can possibly fulfill that role... Stannis cannot. Bran cannot. Only Jon Snow, the bastard with an evil name can be the Night's King...

I can see the temptation being there, but in the end no, I think that if we return to the original synopsis the family Stark will be in the end re-united - some more closely than others. :cool4:

[TheSmallOther]

I can see the temptation being there, but in the end no, I think that if we return to the original synopsis the family Stark will be in the end re-united - some more closely than others. :cool4:

All Starks will turn to the Dark side of the Force? :devil:

[Black Crow]

As I say I can see the temptation. Bran is literally turning to the dark side and Arya too. Arguably Sansa too may be turning that way so it would be odd if Jon didn't, yet in the end according to the synopsis all come together in that climactic battle.

[markg171]

Wait a minute

Aren't these 2 replies in conflict? Who is right here?

And, though the genealogies in the world books support the idea, I find the idea kind of ludicrous. Starks have been in Westeros for what, 8000 years? The people in ASoIaF seem to enjoy fucking, as we do and it seems they do a bit of it. Over that 8000 years, Stark blood has probably spread everywhere. The mere concept of pure First Man blood, without inbreeding (like Craster) surviving unblemished for 8000 years seems a stretch. People producing consistently viable offspring after selective or inbreeding for a long period of time also seems a stretch. The the Targs are around for 300 years (and they also seem to like inbreeding and a bit of first in with the bride fucking) and the lines never mixed. No drunken Starks and Targs ever made a baby by mistake in that time? No bastards (from either line) ever went off and knocked each other up for fun?

It's seems strange, irregular - everyone in ASoIaF fucks everyone, all of the time - apart from Targs and Starks?

We also know that the Starks definitely had contact with the Valyrians and Targaryens many times (they got Ice 400 years ago, Cregan dueled Aemon, etc.) so it's likely that at some point or another they came together and produced a child. There's too much contact that some 4th son of one family and some 3rd cousin of the other didn't get it on.

And as my original quote from Elio and Linda says, just because it wasn't written down doesn't mean it didn't happen or won't eventually be included. They had size constraints that caused things to be left out, and one of those is about how Prince Jacaerys supposedly married Cregan Stark's bastard half sister. Which would be Targaryen's marrying into Starks (well Snow, but same thing), thereby showing that it's happened at least once before.

[Black Crow]

The very fact it never made it into the book suggests it was no big deal

[ummester]

So Jon's parentage may not be important beyond defining his character and giving him closure on an issue? It may mean that Jon is not uniquely capable of anything that no one else has been previously.

[Voice]

This gets right to the heart of how unreliable narration plays out (or doesn't) in these books.

First, let me ask you this: Is the idea that we're supposed to believe whatever we're told, until it's proven false?

Because in that case, Rhaegar raped Lyanna. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.

This info comes from multiple perspectives, one of which is a Stark (Bran). It's never beeen contradicted. We have zero direct, first-hand information about how they spent their time together (if indeed there was any such time), so it really can't be contradicted.

Yet despite this, most book readers arbitrarily choose to believe there was no rape. OK, I don't have a problem with that, but they should admit that they aren't going about things in a consistent manner.

The way I read these books is a little different: GRRM gives us info in various ways, some of which are far more reliable than others. It's up to us to puzzle it through.

First-hand POV info, based on sensory input or thoughts, is all but undeniable. Ned feels the cold air in the crypts; therefore, they were cold at that time. He hears Robert accuse Rhaegar of raping Lyanna; therefore, Robert really said that.

GRRM also tells his readers many things point-blank in interviews, direct e-mails, at conventions, etc. These remarks too I take as essentially gospel, though he is often evasive and shifty and this should be understood. If he says "Draw your own conclusion" about Syrio being dead, that does not mean Syrio is dead (or alive), but that he is being shifty.

Something like "Rhaegar and Lyanna had sex," on the other hand, seems to have very little foundation at all.

There is no POV observation of such an event. Rhaegar's location or locations in his missing time are not even known. Ditto Lyanna. Nobody claims to have seen them have sex. It is nothing but an idea in Robert's head and Bran's head and God only knows how many fan heads.

But it is not at all something that has been demonstrated to my satisfaction and thus, like Schrodinger's cat, must remain in a state of uncertain quantum flux until such time as GRRM opens the box, in a future book, and gives us a peek inside. We can only note it with a ?, refusing to confirm it, deny it, or build theories on top of it.

Totally understand what you're saying. I'll repeat again: I'm open to alternatives. But, there is still the problem of characters in the text saying they had sex with each other, whether it was rape or consensual is not the issue.

According to several...we'll call them unreliable narrators... they had sex. Some other unreliable narrators say Rhaegar loved her. Some other unreliable narrators say Jon looks like Arya, and that Arya looks like Lyanna.

Rhaegar being Jon's father is no less likely than Lyanna being his mother. The text tells us Ned is Jon's father. The text tells us Rhaegar had sex with Lyanna. The rest is conjecture no matter how you slice it.

Unless we abide a few unreliable narrations, we cannot accept Lyanna is Jon's mother, unless we think Ned went targ-style on his sister. And, of course a few trolls have floated that theory LOL.

So I'm decidedly undecided. It's pretty clear we don't have the answer yet. And to date, there are precious few candidates. Ned is the only father of Jon stated in the text. Rhaegar is the only sexual partner of Lyanna's stated in the text.

We have not even the faintest hint of another relationship Lyanna might have had. Not a one.

You have the freedom to believe the narrators you choose and mistrust others. I'm in the same boat of course. But I have a hard time dismissing Rhaegar on the grounds of unreliable narration, as we are led to Lyanna in precisely the same roundabout way.

[Voice]

Well, we do still have one more week left of Lent.

:cheers:

Exactly so - there is no evidence at all other than Robert's fevered imaginings.

Well, no, there's also Bran's comment to Meera and Jojen that Rhaegar raped his aunt...

[Voice]

It's seems strange, irregular - everyone in ASoIaF fucks everyone, all of the time - apart from Targs and Starks?

Well if Jon starts fucking his 11 year old cousin soon, I'll certainly agree with you. Until then, that's a bit of an overstatement. The books are not the show. Not everyone is constantly fucking.