Jump to content
Ran

[Book Spoilers] EP510 Discussion

Recommended Posts

Jon being Ned's bastard fits the evidence perfectly. But the book makes it rather clear he isn't.

How is that at all relevant to the discussion? You just finished insisting that we should ignore the books to talk about the show. And you also were suggesting that Rhaegar+Elia or Robert+Lyanna are the only theories that make sense. So how does what the book says about Ned have anything to do with anything? (I could argue that it doesn't fit the evidence perfectly, which is because every single person who knows Ned thinks there's a mystery in the first place, but again, it's not relevant, so let's not get into it.)

A secret marriage does not save R+L=J. It isn't recognized by the laws of the old gods or the new.

Says who?

A wedding under the Old Gods doesn't need anyone officiating or any specific ceremony. And that's not just from the books; Jon himself even discussed that fact on-air (with Ygritte).

The Seven might require a Septon or some holy gizmos or something, but there's no reason it would be particularly difficult for Rhaegar to get them to the Tower of Joy, when he got half the Kingsguard there.

As you point out, Jon really doesn't need anything to be AAR or anything else. Being the third son through a bigamous marriage isn't really a step up from being a bastard.

So why do you keep saying that R+L=J is impossible because it would mean he's a bastard, if you think that it doesn't even matter if he's a bastard?

I suspect Rhaegar did marry Lyanna, because (a) he may have believed it was important that the Third Head of the Dragon be a Targaryen rather than a Sand, ( B) Lyanna wasn't the kind of girl who would put out without being married, and/or © on top of the prophecy, they actually loved each other, and getting married is what people in that world do when they're in love and want to have children.

But maybe he didn't. (Maybe it's even significant that the Tower was in Dorne, where people often fall in love and have children without marrying?) But the fact that it's possible they didn't get married certainly doesn't prove that they couldn't have gotten married, and, even if that were true, that wouldn't prove that R+L=J is either impossible or meaningless.

I discount the 'evidence' from the maesters because none of it is first hand and the maesters predictions can be wrong.

The Maesters who Rhaegar summoned from around Westeros to examine Elia after her difficult childbirth and recovery don't have first-hand knowledge? How much more first-hand can you get than examining the patient directly?

As for why the child would be kept secret, that is a fact all the theories have to explain.

But R+L=J has a ready-made and blindingly obvious answer for that question: Lyanna was afraid Robert would do something to a Targaryen baby, and when she asked Ned to promise something, it was to make sure Robert didn't find out about her son.

Some of the more far-fetched theories like Ned+Ashara have ready-made answers as well.

Neither Rhaegar+Elia nor Robert+Lyanna has any such answer.

My theory is that it comes comes to the prophecy that seems to have driven Rheagar to self-destruction.

We're told that Rhaegar believed he needed three Targaryen children to be the Dragon with Three Heads and save the world, and that he became obsessed with that prophecy. When he was told Elia couldn't have another child after the first two, he summoned all the best Maesters to get a second opinion, and they all told him the same thing. And then, for some reason, he either abducted or, more likely, eloped with Lyanna. And that pissed off Lyanna's fiance and her family, and incited a rebellion that got his first two kids and himself killed, negating any chance of him achieving his prophetic goals.

So, the only part that's at all theoretical is that the "some reason" he ran off with Lyanna was to produce that prophesied third child. It's certainly possible that child was not Jon, or that they never conceived, but the idea that he was trying to produce the Third Head of the Dragon, and that doing so led to the destruction of all of his endeavors, is almost so far beyond doubt that it's silly to call it a "theory".

We have a little less information on TV than in the books, but everything we do have fits in with the same facts and points in the same direction.

So, yes, I agree with this theory. But this theory is circumstantial evidence in favor of R+L=J, and strong evidence against R+E=J or Robert+L=J, so I'm not sure why you bring it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is for people to discuss the show. The haters trolling it have their own thread, the rant and rave thread. Not content to spew their bile there, they infect every thread on this sub with repetitive D&D suck comments, displacing those of us who enjoy the show and want to discuss it. So you're the troll, not me.

On that note, there really should be a non-detractor thread for those of us (15 million strong) who actually like the show and have more to discuss than how much D&D messed up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Last week: I hope Melisandre dies a terrible death.

This week: Help us, Melisandre, you're our only hope!"

HAHAHA! My feelings exactly.

:bowdown:

Oh, I can satisfy both at once!

Tie the witch to Jon's funeral pyre. Kings blood is good but in the show, witch blood is three times better. According to Mel, Kings blood can wake the stone dragon. Danny used witch blood and got THREE.

So, what do you think Ned meant with "you're of my blood"? That he somehow took his own blood and Elia's and cloned the kid? It means they are related by blood.

And not, Ned didn't use Lyanna's blood to make the kid look "Starkish". That's... preposterous, tbh. Why would Ned raise Rhaegar and Elia's son and use his sister's blood to help them? Why would he risk his own marriage by presenting the kid as a bastard if such kid is not related to him by blood?

Jon Connington's con is Aegon. He's the one conned into believing he's raising Rhaegar's child. He's not part of the con with full knowledge.

Glamours in the book work with some magical artefact. Unless Ned managed to insert some jewel stone into Jon Snow, I don't see how he never noticed he needed to walk around with a necklace that made him look blond when he took it off.

I don't think this is the same glamor as Mel used. consider the following clues:

1) Ned builds a tomb for Lyanna. We are told the answer to Jon's parentage lies in the tomb.

2) Arthur Dayne, Sword of the morning is best friends with Rheagar

3) Rheagar is driven by some prophecy involving AAR and Lightbringer

4) Dayne's sword Dawn is not normal Valyrian steel, it is unique

5) AA forges Lightbringer by plunging it into his wife's breast

6) If Lyanna does not die in childbirth, how does she die?

7) The house words of Dayne would be a spoiler

So the simplest answer would be that Dawn is Lightbringer and Lyanna used it to kill herself and make the glamor permanent as long as it is touching her blood. Ned then buried her with the sword so that it remains in contact with her body and keeps the spell going.

Getting knocked up by Rheagar in a polygamous marriage would not be heroic. Giving your life to protect an infant who is now the legitimate king is totally deserving of a tomb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why wouldn't it be possible for Dany to actually be the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna? We learned from Ned Stark and Jon Arryn's investigation in to Gendry and the other bastards that the hair color was passed through Robert (the father) and you could say the same is true of Jaime's kids and Tywin's kids (all blonde). Although that's a flimsy way to determine genetics, Dany's father would have to have white hair like all the Targaryans. 3 things are important to me about Dany's story: 1) she was a baby during the rebellion and remembers nothing of westeros meaning she was a young baby 2) they go out of their way to point out that Aerys was the Mad King and it's clear that Viscerys shares some of that madness, but Rhaegar apparently did not. Dany does not have it either. In fact she's very sane and often times very noble, just and honorable like Stark. I will admit, character traits like that aren't passed genetically, but I think it's been made clear she is probably the most noble/just character in the story other than any of the Starks. 3) Eddard was so opposed to assassinating Dany when Robert proposed it and campaigned hard to call it off. Other than him being an honorable man, why does he care so much? The Targaryans supposedly butchered his family.

Could it be Lyanna's promise was for him to keep Dany safe? Did the Targaryons only inbreed because normal people could not bear dragon babies and that's what killed Lyanna? For that matter is that what killed Joanna Lannister (Aerrys baby?). Perhaps he had Varys sneak the baby out because he couldn't have Robert butcher his niece?

Just a thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think this is the same glamor as Mel used. consider the following clues:

1) Ned builds a tomb for Lyanna. We are told the answer to Jon's parentage lies in the tomb.

2) Arthur Dayne, Sword of the morning is best friends with Rheagar

3) Rheagar is driven by some prophecy involving AAR and Lightbringer

4) Dayne's sword Dawn is not normal Valyrian steel, it is unique

5) AA forges Lightbringer by plunging it into his wife's breast

6) If Lyanna does not die in childbirth, how does she die?

7) The house words of Dayne would be a spoiler

So the simplest answer would be that Dawn is Lightbringer and Lyanna used it to kill herself and make the glamor permanent as long as it is touching her blood. Ned then buried her with the sword so that it remains in contact with her body and keeps the spell going.

Getting knocked up by Rheagar in a polygamous marriage would not be heroic. Giving your life to protect an infant who is now the legitimate king is totally deserving of a tomb.

If you have to force a theory, then there is not a theory. All the clues give away Lyanna and Rhaegar are Jon's parents. Also, theories are not made of assumptions but evidence. Your theory has too many "ifs" that RLJ has already answered.

Why would be the purpose for Jon being Elia's son in the show? This is not real life when many things happen because they happen. This is a book, or a tv show with a plot (kinda). For Jon being son of Elia, this needs a justification rather than an explanation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is for people to discuss the show. The haters trolling it have their own thread, the rant and rave thread. Not content to spew their bile there, they infect every thread on this sub with repetitive D&D suck comments, displacing those of us who enjoy the show and want to discuss it. So you're the troll, not me.

Pretty much. Every week I lurk a little only to discover, yet again, a small group of people going out of their way to ruin the forum. Some of them have declared that they know longer watch the show, yet have 18k+ posts on the board. That's just pathetic. It's a shame I know of no other outlet to discuss the show and the books. Lord knows, I'm a simpleton who doesn't understand the complexities of pages upon pages discussing lemon cakes, pigeon pies and finding out where whores go, but I'd still like to discuss Game of Thrones. Then again, I did read Feast and Dance twice, so clearly I'm a glutton for punishment.

Edited by I'm_Tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree. Trant is an a-hole but for all we know is that he is following orders. To him maybe he felt he had no choice but to beat Sansa and kill (?) Syrio. It felt like the show had to make him worse for the murder to be more shocking or understandable. That's besides the point. This is about Arya's development of becoming a single minded,cold, calculating,ruthless assassin. Not about hurray! Arya killed some really despicable person that deserved to die. I think that actually detracts to what she is becoming and also detracts from why she killed him. Most people are like "yay that pedo beating prick got his" instead of "for Syrio!". It's also supposed to be sad about what she is becoming.

This is still early in her transformation; they need us rooting for her at the start, so they can gradually make her actions more brutal and less justified until there's finally a point (hopefully a different point for different viewers) where we stop being able to go along for the ride and start being shocked at what she's become. That's how you write Breaking Bad (or at least Falling Down), instead of Revenge of the Sith.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why wouldn't it be possible for Dany to actually be the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna? We learned from Ned Stark and Jon Arryn's investigation in to Gendry and the other bastards that the hair color was passed through Robert (the father) and you could say the same is true of Jaime's kids and Tywin's kids (all blonde). Although that's a flimsy way to determine genetics, Dany's father would have to have white hair like all the Targaryans. 3 things are important to me about Dany's story: 1) she was a baby during the rebellion and remembers nothing of westeros meaning she was a young baby 2) they go out of their way to point out that Aerys was the Mad King and it's clear that Viscerys shares some of that madness, but Rhaegar apparently did not. Dany does not have it either. In fact she's very sane and often times very noble, just and honorable like Stark. I will admit, character traits like that aren't passed genetically, but I think it's been made clear she is probably the most noble/just character in the story other than any of the Starks. 3) Eddard was so opposed to assassinating Dany when Robert proposed it and campaigned hard to call it off. Other than him being an honorable man, why does he care so much? The Targaryans supposedly butchered his family.

Could it be Lyanna's promise was for him to keep Dany safe? Did the Targaryons only inbreed because normal people could not bear dragon babies and that's what killed Lyanna? For that matter is that what killed Joanna Lannister (Aerrys baby?). Perhaps he had Varys sneak the baby out because he couldn't have Robert butcher his niece?

Just a thought.

R+L=J is totally possible timewise. But the argument against it is that two characters we are told are paragons of virtue have to forget themselves and commit adultery behind Elia's back.

Jon really believes that there is no place for him in society because he is a bastard. Being a legitimized or bigamous bastard does not change that situation in Jon's eyes.

And yes, Jon's hair has to change color if R+E=J. That was the original point. Based on my hypothesis that R+E=J, I predicted that Jon's appearance would change in a major way next season. And now we hear that maybe Kit won't play Jon at all.

It also appears very likely that Benjen is returning. That was always on the cards for book 6. While Ned may not have told Benjen who Jon's father is, it would be logical for Ned to tell Benjen what his promise to Lyanna was so that it could be kept if he died suddenly. What if the promise was to 'protect all the children'.

If Ned didn't tell Benjen, the only way left to reveal it would be a note in Lyanna's tomb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is for people to discuss the show. The haters trolling it have their own thread, the rant and rave thread. Not content to spew their bile there, they infect every thread on this sub with repetitive D&D suck comments, displacing those of us who enjoy the show and want to discuss it. So you're the troll, not me.

You truly are one of a kind. So because our opinion isn't the same as yours we're trolls? Look at the name of this thread and you'll see its meant for discussing this episode.

I'm discussing the episode same way you are.

You saying book readers opinion is bile and they infect threads is trolling mate.

Don't like my opinion? To damn bad, I'll share it anyway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why wouldn't it be possible for Dany to actually be the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna? We learned from Ned Stark and Jon Arryn's investigation in to Gendry and the other bastards that the hair color was passed through Robert (the father) and you could say the same is true of Jaime's kids and Tywin's kids (all blonde). Although that's a flimsy way to determine genetics, Dany's father would have to have white hair like all the Targaryans. 3 things are important to me about Dany's story: 1) she was a baby during the rebellion and remembers nothing of westeros meaning she was a young baby 2) they go out of their way to point out that Aerys was the Mad King and it's clear that Viscerys shares some of that madness, but Rhaegar apparently did not. Dany does not have it either. In fact she's very sane and often times very noble, just and honorable like Stark. I will admit, character traits like that aren't passed genetically, but I think it's been made clear she is probably the most noble/just character in the story other than any of the Starks. 3) Eddard was so opposed to assassinating Dany when Robert proposed it and campaigned hard to call it off. Other than him being an honorable man, why does he care so much? The Targaryans supposedly butchered his family.

Could it be Lyanna's promise was for him to keep Dany safe? Did the Targaryons only inbreed because normal people could not bear dragon babies and that's what killed Lyanna? For that matter is that what killed Joanna Lannister (Aerrys baby?). Perhaps he had Varys sneak the baby out because he couldn't have Robert butcher his niece?

Just a thought.

Because Dany was born later at Dragonstone with witnesses such as her brother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty much. Every week I lurk a little only to discover, yet again, a small group of people going out of their way to ruin the forum. Some of them have declared that they know longer watch the show, yet have 18k+ posts on the board. That's just pathetic. It's a shame I know of no other outlet to discuss the show and the books. Lord knows, I'm a simpleton who doesn't understand the complexities of pages upon pages discussing lemon cakes, pigeon pies and finding out where whores go, but I'd still like to discuss Game of Thrones. Then again, I did read Feast and Dance twice, so clearly I'm a glutton for punishment.

Its pathetic people have the idea their opinion is worth more. So much more that those who don't agree with it are trolls and are pathetic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Jon's hair being black is important. Eddard's hair wasn't black and neither was Rhaegar's. They made a special point that Roberts family line has black hair though. I think the evidence of the parentage for him is in front of our faces. Black hair= Baratheon and his bond with Ghost the Direwolf (much like the Stark kids) means he's also a Stark. Maybe Lyanna got impregnated by Robert, who by Cersei's words was strong and powerful and sought by every woman in Westeros, but was already with Rhaegar and finding out she was pregnant with Roberts baby drove him mad and he killed her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Jon's hair being black is important. Eddard's hair wasn't black and neither was Rhaegar's. They made a special point that Roberts family line has black hair though. I think the evidence of the parentage for him is in front of our faces. Black hair= Baratheon and his bond with Ghost the Direwolf (much like the Stark kids) means he's also a Stark. Maybe Lyanna got impregnated by Robert, who by Cersei's words was strong and powerful and sought by every woman in Westeros, but was already with Rhaegar and finding out she was pregnant with Roberts baby drove him mad and he killed her.

Black hair and blue eyes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You truly are one of a kind. So because our opinion isn't the same as yours we're trolls? Look at the name of this thread and you'll see its meant for discussing this episode.

I'm discussing the episode same way you are.

You saying book readers opinion is bile and they infect threads is trolling mate.

Don't like my opinion? To damn bad, I'll share it anyway

When you have a thread dedicated for your discussion topic and you disrupt another thread for a different purpose, with the result of causing dissension and disruption of the conversation, then you are a troll. That is the definition of a troll. Please note I don't go into the rant and rave thread.

Also, everyone on here is a BOOK READER. I've read the books, too, but I also like the shows. The sheer arrogance of that assumption is mind boggling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lord knows, I'm a simpleton who doesn't understand the complexities of pages upon pages discussing lemon cakes, pigeon pies and finding out where whores go

I was so sure I understood that last one. When I was reading the book, Quality Inn (or Comfort Inn, or one of the others in the same chain) had those "Where Do You Go" ads, showing a businessman on a business trip in business New York, a family with two young kids going to not-trademarked-Disneyland, etc. But then they didn't have one with a group of working girls going to Vegas for convention season.

but I'd still like to discuss Game of Thrones. Then again, I did read Feast and Dance twice, so clearly I'm a glutton for punishment.

More seriously, I think there are forums out there for people to discuss GoT without ASoIaF. And, even on this forum, if you go to the "no spoilers" threads instead of the "book spoilers" threads, there's a lot less cross-contamination.

But I personally find it interesting to compare and contrast the two, and try to speculate on which storylines will converge and which won't, and so on.

Yes, it means you have to deal with some people who always compare and contrast by saying "one is the best thing ever written, and the other is worse than Cleopatra 2525", and who speculate on which storylines will converge by saying "D&D are stupid, so they will do the stupidest thing possible, except that they can't possibly do what they very obviously set up to do in the next episode because that's not what happened in the books and therefore it's impossible". But there are still interesting discussions that happen around them--often started by people who are "book purists" but aren't insane about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The show is nothing more than a terrible copy of a work of literary art. GRRM was right to leave Hollywood the first time. Benioff and Weiss had all the necessary components to make this show great, but in the pursuit of 'making the show their own' they have made a frankenstein of poor story construction, massive plot holes, sloppy storylines, and an overall disregard for the source material. Everything was done for them, all they had to do was follow the plan, instead they threw the instructions away and were like "who needs all these extra screws and shit, pffft, we got this."


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you have a thread dedicated for your discussion topic and you disrupt another thread for a different purpose, with the result of causing dissension and disruption of the conversation, then you are a troll. That is the definition of a troll. Please note I don't go into the rant and rave thread.

Also, everyone on here is a BOOK READER. I've read the books, too, but I also like the shows. The sheer arrogance of that assumption is mind boggling.

Ah done with you. And your opinion that your opinion is somehow correct and mines is wrong and bile amazes me.

I didn't disrupt it, your just keen on starting an argument both on this forum and the other by getting personal. That is the definition of a troll

Edited by Nights King's Queen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its pathetic people have the idea their opinion is worth more. So much more that those who don't agree with it are trolls and are pathetic.

I'm talking about the vitriol spewed from the 'book purists,' as if the vast majority of us haven't read the books multiple times. If a poster openly proclaims they quit watching the show, yet shows up after every episode to belittle the show and those that, heaven forbid, actually enjoy it, they're trolling.

I think Feast is a really poorly structured and written book. Yet, I don't go to the forum daily to remind everyone that I think it was a massive disappointment. That would be trolling, and I'm not here to ruin everyone's time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What was the point of the Cersei flashback in episode 1? It was never referenced or expanded upon, and, as far as I can tell, played no part in the story. I didn't like it in the books, so I was hoping they would cut it out, especially as they haven't gone with the crazy Cersei route.



I rewatched the episode because I wanted to give the Arya scenes another lookover and my God, Dorne is actually worse on a second viewing. Why the hell does Ellaria wait until her nose starts to bleed before taking the antidote? I'll tell you why: because they wanted a cool TV shot, even though its a very stupid thing to do. I don't care how knowledgable you are about poison, you don't wait until things almost get to the point of no-return before taking the antidote.



And no military commander, no matter how stupid, would do what Stannis did in this episode. Greatest military commander of Westeros my arse.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×