Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

UnmaskedLurker

A+J=T v.5

Recommended Posts

So you take the mere sentence stating: joanne was/might have been around aerys during tyrions conceiving as a statement for all other info to suddenly be clues? Well I personally consider that odd, but that's your choice.

I personally do not believe in A+J=T because of two reasons basicly:

1. R+L=J Has way more support and is very likely to be true. Having a second hidden Targ doesn't make sense considering GRRMs writing style (at least that's how I see it)

2. What does A+J=T bring to the story? His epic 'revenge' (or w/e you want to call it, cant think of a better english word atm) on Tywin wouldn't make a lot off sense. Just like the possible reveal that Tywin already was poisoned by Oberyn (not proven, but very likely) would screw that totally up. His entire storyarc was about struggeling with his fathers approval (I should say: lack of approval). Tywin NOT being his father would screw that entire storyline over. And what does it bring: nothing much at this point.. maybe being the third head of the dragon and becoming King in the end.. but was does that mean? The real endgame will be about the Others, at least thats how I see it.

But that's just my opinion. Very little evidence is there to actually support it, and most seems circumstantional to me. But you are free to think differently and I hope you succeed in convincing me ;)

Lmao.

 

You have 2 points, the first one is that there's an easier to see mystery in the books lol.  "Well the first time I came on this website I saw R+L=J pinned to the top of the first page, and from that point forth took that theory and all the opinions shared in the thread to be the bees knees, includng their opinion of spiting this notion because they didnt pick up on it while perpetually discussing a notion discovered by the first person to read the first book he first time 20 years ago."

 

2. It adds to the story whatever GRRM sees it adding.  You know how many people would have questioned what the Red Wedding adds to the story? How many people stopped reading after that point? The man isnt intimidated by your opinion on the matter (something i hope all detractors come to realize seeing as the only "wishful thinking" involved here is with the people who unreasonably dispute this with things like "this adds nothing" as if your dissatisfaction is somehow gona reach GRRM and he ll just like change the story lol)  God the whole paragraph is filled with nonsense.  "What does it add to the Tywin storyline now that hes dead" Like the logical way of looking at that would be how could it possibly detract from that story/relationship considering is over? "His epic revenge wouldnt make sense" Why the hell not lmao? Did Tywin still not sentence him to death? Did he not still fuck Shae and have Tysha gangraped? Tysha who actually loved Tyrion for who he was?  "What does it bring, him being the 3rd head and maybe King"  LMFAO ya only that pointless stuff.

 

Very little evidence to support the intrinsic lack of logic of your 2 points even within the parameters of them not being enough to stand up against this theory by themselves.  And nobody needs to succeed in convincing you lmao.  You realize how many people in this world disagree with the concept of Global Warming?  Like I can accept that there are people who troll their own minds and refute plain evidence in this world, people don't come on here to try and persuade 100% of the users (or at least they shouldnt) people come on here to express the ideas and get feedback and potentially even participate in reasonable debate/discussion, as well as log the ideas with a date next to them so when the books do actually come out we can reflect on how foreshadowing was compiled to discover something before it occured

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The evidence that is there isn't enoug for me to believe it. And GRRM probably will never say in the books if it's true or not, maybe outside of it. However, we are SURE that we will learn Jons parentage. Which makes me wonder: does it even matter who Tyrions father is? Probably not..

Oh exactly, thats why after Tyrion has ridden Viserion people like you will still be coming on here years from now like "oh it never was really proven" because GRRM very well might not feel the need to spell it out to us as if he's intending the novels for 10 year olds

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh exactly, thats why after Tyrion has ridden Viserion people like you will still be coming on here years from now like "oh it never was really proven" because GRRM very well might not feel the need to spell it out to us as if he's intending the novels for 10 year olds


Or, maybe he'll leave it open ended because there's more than one valid interpretation. Like, ya know, all art.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh the ever unique standards of detraction for this one specific theory.

 

1."Oh well your gona have to convince me" vs actually reading the books and evidence for yourself and stating why they individually AND collectively don't make sense and add up.

 

2."Oh well why would there be a hidden/secret Targ other than Jon.  And if there is why isn't this as well known and over-discussed as Jon being Raegars son?" vs not creating some sort of totally nonsensical mutual exclusion with a far more see-through mystery, and not basing a theory's validity on comparing it with the over-discussion of another theory, an over-discussion specific only to this website, an over-discussion that has literally lead to theorys like Jon being all 3 heads and those types of theorys actually being taken seriously.

 

3. "Oh well im of the personal opinion that this would ruin a now extinct relationship dynamic" vs actually disputing the evidence, and not coming up with this line of argument thats so blatantly not applied to R+L=J.  If you can say with a straight face that Tyrion not being Aerys son would have a more negative impact on the story arc and Tyrions conception of self (not a negative impact on how you view the storyuline which would obviously not be important to anybody or anything) vs Jons arc and his conception of self then god bless because thats laughable and the oppsite of logic.  Tyrion finds out Tywin isnt his - 1. This would firstly not make Tywin the nonsensically douchy supervillian without any reasoning that he seemingly is, something GRRM doesnt do outside of maybe Ramsay (theres justifications for everybody besides Ramsay, if you dont believe me your wrong and can reread to prove yourself wrong, even Gregor has some type of brain tumor) 2. Tyrion wouldnt be a kinslayer, which is obvious enough given that nothing terrible has befallen him yet 3. He KILLED his dad, he'll be glad to know he wasnt his father lol, not that he'll be thrilled with the alternative but still... Jon finds out Ned isnt his dad - He probably has a much more difficult time with it considering he bases his whole morality and personhood off of Neds values and memory vs the guy who resented his father enough to murder him

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or, maybe he'll leave it open ended because there's more than one valid interpretation. Like, ya know, all art.

Omg lol are you literally already hedging your position while standing behind it still openly? So your already talking a world where Tyrion rides Viserion and theres still a debate? Dear god lol, what a non-applicable comment of sarcasm too, explain to me how in a world where he rides a dragon theres more than one valid interpretation lmfao, like what does that even mean? He rides the dragon and theres more than one valid interpretation? Even if he didnt, how does that make sense? There's proper ways to interpret it where he was sired by either or? Like either could be intpreted to be the case like there isnt even a defintve concept by GRRM on who his father is? Jeeeeezzz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2. What does A+J=T bring to the story? His epic 'revenge' (or w/e you want to call it, cant think of a better english word atm) on Tywin wouldn't make a lot off sense. Just like the possible reveal that Tywin already was poisoned by Oberyn (not proven, but very likely) would screw that totally up. His entire storyarc was about struggeling with his fathers approval (I should say: lack of approval). Tywin NOT being his father would screw that entire storyline over. And what does it bring: nothing much at this point.. maybe being the third head of the dragon and becoming King in the end.. but was does that mean? The real endgame will be about the Others, at least thats how I see it.

 

Tyrion's revenge on his abusive adopted father who treated his half sister and brother better than him, to the point of actually trying to convict him of murder so he could be executed is not a good story arc?

And there are other intertwining stories that are just as important as Tyrion's story. Like Aerys and Tywin's life long battle against each other. To the point where Tywin brutally sacks King's Landing and has all of the Targaryens killed. And in the end it is Aerys bastard son, that Tywin had to raise as his own that kills Tywin.

 

And as far as the Oberyn poisoning Tywin, that shows how three dimensional GRRM's characters are. Oberyn had plans in case his fight with the Mountain went bad. Oberyn was making plans off screen because that is how the world works. Everyone has plans, everyone is doing something at all times, they do not just wait till they are on screen like a video game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Yea i mean I didnt even bother leaving it to opinion that it may not be a good story arc in my response to that; I figured it'd go further to point out how that whole post is a contradiction of itself lol, from the very beginning with "what would it add to the story... maybe him being the 3rd head and potentially king" lol, and then just tries to completely divert from his losing battle by saying something broadly right (yet not at all applicable/relevant to the discussion at hand) like "I think the real endgame will be with the Others but thats just me" like lol ok 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tyrion's revenge on his abusive adopted father who treated his half sister and brother better than him, to the point of actually trying to convict him of murder so he could be executed is not a good story arc?
And there are other intertwining stories that are just as important as Tyrion's story. Like Aerys and Tywin's life long battle against each other. To the point where Tywin brutally sacks King's Landing and has all of the Targaryens killed. And in the end it is Aerys bastard son, that Tywin had to raise as his own that kills Tywin.
 
And as far as the Oberyn poisoning Tywin, that shows how three dimensional GRRM's characters are. Oberyn had plans in case his fight with the Mountain went bad. Oberyn was making plans off screen because that is how the world works. Everyone has plans, everyone is doing something at all times, they do not just wait till they are on screen like a video game.

The entire point that tyrion looks the most like his father in character (instead of jamie like tywin wanted) made that entire story arc so good (classic irony). Not being tyrions father would make that part useless ans yes, it wouldn't be such story arc that way.

Lmao.
 
You have 2 points, the first one is that there's an easier to see mystery in the books lol.  "Well the first time I came on this website I saw R+L=J pinned to the top of the first page, and from that point forth took that theory and all the opinions shared in the thread to be the bees knees, includng their opinion of spiting this notion because they didnt pick up on it while perpetually discussing a notion discovered by the first person to read the first book he first time 20 years ago."
 
2. It adds to the story whatever GRRM sees it adding.  You know how many people would have questioned what the Red Wedding adds to the story? How many people stopped reading after that point? The man isnt intimidated by your opinion on the matter (something i hope all detractors come to realize seeing as the only "wishful thinking" involved here is with the people who unreasonably dispute this with things like "this adds nothing" as if your dissatisfaction is somehow gona reach GRRM and he ll just like change the story lol)  God the whole paragraph is filled with nonsense.  "What does it add to the Tywin storyline now that hes dead" Like the logical way of looking at that would be how could it possibly detract from that story/relationship considering is over? "His epic revenge wouldnt make sense" Why the hell not lmao? Did Tywin still not sentence him to death? Did he not still fuck Shae and have Tysha gangraped? Tysha who actually loved Tyrion for who he was?  "What does it bring, him being the 3rd head and maybe King"  LMFAO ya only that pointless stuff.
 
Very little evidence to support the intrinsic lack of logic of your 2 points even within the parameters of them not being enough to stand up against this theory by themselves.  And nobody needs to succeed in convincing you lmao.  You realize how many people in this world disagree with the concept of Global Warming?  Like I can accept that there are people who troll their own minds and refute plain evidence in this world, people don't come on here to try and persuade 100% of the users (or at least they shouldnt) people come on here to express the ideas and get feedback and potentially even participate in reasonable debate/discussion, as well as log the ideas with a date next to them so when the books do actually come out we can reflect on how foreshadowing was compiled to discover something before it occured


I never stated that R+L=J makes sure A+J=T isn't true. I just said I dont feel that's very likely.

Lol, global warming.. in that entire part of your post you're actually doing what you are accusing me off. I'll quit with the argument here, because this isn't going anywere.

Oh exactly, thats why after Tyrion has ridden Viserion people like you will still be coming on here years from now like "oh it never was really proven" because GRRM very well might not feel the need to spell it out to us as if he's intending the novels for 10 year olds

Yep, I still won't believe it. Why? Because GRRM explicitly stated that you don't need to be Targ/have 'dragonblood' to ridr a dragon. No proof there.

[spoiler]Don't freak out lol[/spoiler]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Omg lol are you literally already hedging your position while standing behind it still openly? So your already talking a world where Tyrion rides Viserion and theres still a debate? Dear god lol, what a non-applicable comment of sarcasm too, explain to me how in a world where he rides a dragon theres more than one valid interpretation lmfao, like what does that even mean? He rides the dragon and theres more than one valid interpretation? Even if he didnt, how does that make sense? There's proper ways to interpret it where he was sired by either or? Like either could be intpreted to be the case like there isnt even a defintve concept by GRRM on who his father is? Jeeeeezzz


Yes, lololololololol, I'm saying there could be multiple interpretations for why Tyrion rides Viserion just as there's multiple interpretations for why Nettles could ride sheepstealer. There's plenty of people who don't have a strong position on this or other theories and simply enjoy discussing their merits, rather than dismissing anyone who disagrees with a juvenile mix of anger and indignance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The entire point that tyrion looks the most like his father in character (instead of jamie like tywin wanted) made that entire story arc so good (classic irony). Not being tyrions father would make that part useless ans yes, it wouldn't be such story arc that way.


I never stated that R+L=J makes sure A+J=T isn't true. I just said I dont feel that's very likely.

Lol, global warming.. in that entire part of your post you're actually doing what you are accusing me off. I'll quit with the argument here, because this isn't going anywere.
Yep, I still won't believe it. Why? Because GRRM explicitly stated that you don't need to be Targ/have 'dragonblood' to ridr a dragon. No proof there.

[spoiler]Don't freak out lol[/spoiler]

1. I love how "looks like Tywin most in character" makes zero sense as a sentence unless using look to describe character unless your subliminally agruing with yourself about how Tyrion looks physically (ya know what the word look is used for) unlike the twins with Targaryen esque deviations.

 

2,. I know you never literally said that. I do know what you did say however which was having only 2 reasons for disbelieving this, and one of them being entirely revolved around what you percieve regarding Jon having more evidence and the notion having more signigance without this also being true. I can repost what you said lol, just becaue you respond outisde of the context that you yourself started n the argument doesnt mean people are going to miss the previous comment and then think you more reasonable.

 

3. Your explicitly wrong saying GRRM said you don't need to have dragonblood to ride a dragon, not the quote at all. there's quite literally zero evidence of anybody in the history of his whole world outside of the bloodlines of the Valyrian Dragonlords riding dragons.  So feel free to dispute that point or too post the actual SSM that your skewing/ straight up changing to fit your argument

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The entire point that tyrion looks the most like his father in character (instead of jamie like tywin wanted) made that entire story arc so good (classic irony). Not being tyrions father would make that part useless ans yes, it wouldn't be such story arc that way.

Yep, I still won't believe it. Why? Because GRRM explicitly stated that you don't need to be Targ/have 'dragonblood' to ridr a dragon. No proof there.

[spoiler]Don't freak out lol[/spoiler]

Tyrion would still have Lannister blood through his mother, so he could have inherited all of that anyway regardless if Tywin is his father. Plus, there is such thing as Nurture vs Nature. He could be like Tywin because he was raised by Tywin. Now what you have is ironic that the child that is not his is the most like him.

 

Also, GRRM said nothing about Dragonblood. He said it didn't necessarily have to be a Targaryen, but a bastard Targaryen is not a Targaryen, Tyrion would be a Hill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, lololololololol, I'm saying there could be multiple interpretations for why Tyrion rides Viserion just as there's multiple interpretations for why Nettles could ride sheepstealer. There's plenty of people who don't have a strong position on this or other theories and simply enjoy discussing their merits, rather than dismissing anyone who disagrees with a juvenile mix of anger and indignance.

WHAT ARE THE MULTIPLE INTERPRETATIONS? None, he rides a dragon Aerys was his sire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tyrion would still have Lannister blood through his mother, so he could have inherited all of that anyway regardless if Tywin is his father. Plus, there is such thing as Nurture vs Nature. He could be like Tywin because he was raised by Tywin. Now what you have is ironic that the child that is not his is the most like him.

 

Also, GRRM said nothing about Dragonblood. He said it didn't necessarily have to be a Targaryen, but a bastard Targaryen is not a Targaryen, Tyrion would be a Hill.

Yea the same nature vs nurture concept that people realize and apply with Jon being the most like Ned even though Rhaegar is his father lol, its just a matter of voluntary ignorance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WHAT ARE THE MULTIPLE INTERPRETATIONS? None, he rides a dragon Aerys was his sire


THATS YOUR OPINION. An opinion that relies on the assumption that you need dragonblood to ride a dragon. Kind of like how some people think Nettles bonded with Sheepstealer through feeding/training while others assume she had dragon blood. That would be multiple interpretations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Tyrion would still have Lannister blood through his mother, so he could have inherited all of that anyway regardless if Tywin is his father. Plus, there is such thing as Nurture vs Nature. He could be like Tywin because he was raised by Tywin. Now what you have is ironic that the child that is not his is the most like him.
 
Also, GRRM said nothing about Dragonblood. He said it didn't necessarily have to be a Targaryen, but a bastard Targaryen is not a Targaryen, Tyrion would be a Hill.


True, character isn't necesarrely genetic, but the point that they both ARE his sons (as far as we know for sure up to now) makes it that much better.

Yeah hence the /. Wasn't sure whether it was blood or targ. I guess it was targ.

1. I love how "looks like Tywin most in character" makes zero sense as a sentence unless using look to describe character unless your subliminally agruing with yourself about how Tyrion looks physically (ya know what the word look is used for) unlike the twins with Targaryen esque deviations.
 
2,. I know you never literally said that. I do know what you did say however which was having only 2 reasons for disbelieving this, and one of them being entirely revolved around what you percieve regarding Jon having more evidence and the notion having more signigance without this also being true. I can repost what you said lol, just becaue you respond outisde of the context that you yourself started n the argument doesnt mean people are going to miss the previous comment and then think you more reasonable.
 
3. Your explicitly wrong saying GRRM said you don't need to have dragonblood to ride a dragon, not the quote at all. there's quite literally zero evidence of anybody in the history of his whole world outside of the bloodlines of the Valyrian Dragonlords riding dragons.  So feel free to dispute that point or too post the actual SSM that your skewing/ straight up changing to fit your argument


1. Awesome, use my lack of english to crush my point. How mature.

2. Those are my main reasons.

3. I was using a slash between targ and dragonblood becausr I wasn't sure which one it was. So I guess it's Targ.. Doesn't make me explicitly wrong.

You are twisting my words, leaving out info or not responding to my entire post but just bashing on a wrong choice of words. I will no longer reply to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×