Jump to content

Archived

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

SFDanny

R+L=J v147

Recommended Posts

Wow, lots of stuff here.

If it was found that Brandon dishonored Ashara, Rhaegar or the Daynes, as in AD's older brother would openly call the Starks out and be damned to Brandons betrothed.

Someone would marry Ashara, be it Ned or Brandon himself.

I mean LF called Brandon out.

Again, I go back to The story of Jorahs tourney. When I first read that, I knew why Rhaegar was determined to win and crown Lyanna.

And if you look at Arya, I wouldn't be surprised if Lyannas smile died too, and she actually didn't take it, and it was Rhaegar who saved the crown himself, giving it to her later as her marriage garland at the TOJ.

Ah--when I read about Jorah's tourney, I got a bit of a different spin. His intense desire for that woman underlined what crowning the queen of love and beauty meant. Same with Barristan re: Ashara. It's romantic--with all of the attendant baggage. Period. And thus, completely inappropriate for a married man to use the occasion to give the crown to a young, unmarried girl. It's a sign of romantic (and sexual) intent--Rhaegar shouldn't have done it.

But, agree that Rhaegar may have had similar desire to Jorah--that does work. But, unfortunately, wouldn't make his giving Lyanna the crown any more socially acceptable. . .

And also agree on the Daynes calling the Starks out re: Ashara--that would make a lot more sense than the passive aggressing crowning. Still, the crowning for revenge would make the insult to the family bigger--insult the Stark daughter. In my head, it's hard to make that fit with the few details we have on Rhaegar and Arthur--not impossible, but hard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah--when I read about Jorah's tourney, I got a bit of a different spin. His intense desire for that woman underlined what crowning the queen of love and beauty meant. Same with Barristan re: Ashara. It's romantic--with all of the attendant baggage. Period. And thus, completely inappropriate for a married man to use the occasion to give the crown to a young, unmarried girl. It's a sign of romantic (and sexual) intent--Rhaegar shouldn't have done it.

But, agree that Rhaegar may have had similar desire to Jorah--that does work. But, unfortunately, wouldn't make his giving Lyanna the crown any more socially acceptable. . .

And also agree on the Daynes calling the Starks out re: Ashara--that would make a lot more sense than the passive aggressing crowning. Still, the crowning for revenge would make the insult to the family bigger--insult the Stark daughter. In my head, it's hard to make that fit with the few details we have on Rhaegar and Arthur--not impossible, but hard.

but wait a moment, because Jorah wore Lynesse's favor before the tourney even started.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem to have equated that a burning sword needs to be a flaming one, despite the sword never having been described as being on fire.

Burning red could mean

- the sword is red because it's hot, like a fire poker that's been in a fire. It's not actually on fire though, the metal just turned red because of heat it was subjected to

- the sword is radiating red light, like Stannis' Lightbringer does (his sword though also glows yellow, orange, etc)

- the sword is covered in fire

You chose the last option and said that it's the only option to explain why Jon's sword looks the way it does when it's not. And the only true burning sword (Beric's) we have in the books burns with red and yellow flame. This sword is only red, so it doesn't fit that it's been flamed by Rh'llor

Jon also happens to be wielding Longclaw in the dream, not Ice. And you seem to be quite sure that Ice is Lightbringer, so then Jon is not wielding Lightbringer in his dream, no?

Dreams speak in symbols, so no, the fact he is holding Longclaw doesn't seem like a problem to me. Longclaw is his sword, but it was "burring red in his hand." Now, I really do think that has to mean on fire, but either of your other two slightly-different interpretations would still imply Azor Ahai in terms of symbolism. A sword burning red implies Azor Ahai's sword, no matter how you slice it.

Just fyi, i'm about 60% that Ned's sword was the original LB. It could be that all V steel swords had the black sun-drinking moonstone rock, and any V steel sword can become a Lightbringer. The symbolism mostly fits either scenario. It's the funky way Ned's sword acts when Tobho tries to color it that really keeps me coming back to ned's sword being unique, with a black layer that is not steel.

Edited for typos..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and Mance's cloak.

Yes--that could be a parallel. Unless some backstory turns up about Mance as plucky runaway Targaryen boy who ended up with a raiding party to eventually be raised at the Wall (not impossible, but still . . . )--am thinking the red and black is at most an affectation for Mance. Who likes Jon. Hardly rock solid. But it is there . . .

ETA--didn't see the other red and black you listed before this message. Agree it's there. But back to LmL--the fire imagery is there, too. It just is--will have to be dealt with somehow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but wait a moment, because Jorah wore Lynesse's favor before the tourney even started.

Right--but the crowning seems to imply "winning" the woman. Declaring her "best"--and having the right to do so. Up to interp, of course. Just how I read it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HA! Now have Howland in my head, monologuing in symbols like Jojen, while Jon tries to figure out what the hell he actually means.

If there is to a reveal-by-monolgue, I'd kinda prefer Benjen--at least his monologue would be succinct.

And fully agree on the Jon Arryn misdirect. It fooled me--not too proud to admit. That being said, on this point I agree with LmL--that red and black imagery is there. Could be a red herring. Could be something else. Could be what it currently seems to be--Jon is Rhaegar's northern baby boy. Not sure. Books aren't done. But agree Arthur as father isn't off the table. Not yet, anyway.

Same here. I was 100% Cersei killed Jon Arryn and I still think RLJ is a very strong theory.

I started reading ASOIAF more than a decade ago and last week I was arguing with someone on reddit that Arthur Dayne as a father doesn't make any sense. But Parris statement about RLJ was bugging me for years. And there's something about Daynes. So I was not 100% on RLJ, but I was still pretty much convinced. But this week I read something about Dany, Jon and Stannis that made me think about the whole thing. And I was a firm believer in RLJ for 10 years! And now I am not sure. I still believe R+L=J makes more sense then alternative. We have more text about it. But that doesn't mean R+L=J is a fact. There are alternatives, and RLJ could be a red herring. Just like Cersei killing Jon Arryn was a red herring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right--but the crowning seems to imply "winning" the woman. Declaring her "best"--and having the right to do so. Up to interp, of course. Just how I read it.

Maybe a little more of that story is in order

"To celebrate his victory, Robert ordained that a tourney should be held outside Lannisport. It was there I saw Lynesse, a maid half my age. She had come up from Oldtown with her father to see her brothers joust. I could not take my eyes off her. In a fit of madness, I begged her favor to wear in the tourney, never dreaming she would grant my request, yet she did.

"I fight as well as any man, Khaleesi, but I have never been a tourney knight. Yet with Lynesse's favor knotted round my arm, I was a different man. I won joust after joust. Lord Jason Mallister fell before me, and Bronze Yohn Royce. Ser Ryman Frey, his brother Ser Hosteen, Lord Whent, Strongboar, even Ser Boros Blount of the Kingsguard, I unhorsed them all. In the last match, I broke nine lances against Jaime Lannister to no result, and King Robert gave me the champion's laurel. I crowned Lynesse queen of love and beauty, and that very night went to her father and asked for her hand. I was drunk, as much on glory as on wine. By rights I should have gotten a contemptuous refusal, but Lord Leyton accepted my offer. We were married there in Lannisport, and for a fortnight I was the happiest man in the wide world."

...

"I lived for her smiles, so I sent all the way to Oldtown for a new cook, and brought a harper from Lannisport. Goldsmiths, jewelers, dressmakers, whatever she wanted I found for her, but it was never enough. Bear Island is rich in bears and trees, and poor in aught else. I built a fine ship for her and we sailed to Lannisport and Oldtown for festivals and fairs, and once even to Braavos, where I borrowed heavily from the money-lenders. It was as a tourney champion that I had won her hand and heart, so I entered other tourneys for her sake, but the magic was gone. I never distinguished myself again...

"The rest . . . I did things it shames me to speak of. For gold. So Lynesse might keep her jewels, her harper, and her cook. In the end it cost me all. When I heard that Eddard Stark was coming to Bear Island, I was so lost to honor that rather than stay and face his judgment, I took her with me into exile. Nothing mattered but our love, I told myself. We fled to Lys, where I sold my ship for gold to keep us."

His voice was thick with grief, and Dany was reluctant to press him any further, yet she had to know how it ended. "Did she die there?" she asked him gently.

"Only to me," he said. "In half a year my gold was gone, and I was obliged to take service as a sellsword. While I was fighting Braavosi on the Rhoyne, Lynesse moved into the manse of a merchant prince named Tregar Ormollen. They say she is his chief concubine now, and even his wife goes in fear of her."

Dany was horrified. "Do you hate her?"

"Almost as much as I love her," Ser Jorah answered. "Pray excuse me, my queen. I find I am very tired."

She gave him leave to go, but as he was lifting the flap of her tent, she could not stop herself calling after him with one last question. "What did she look like, your Lady Lynesse?"

Ser Jorah smiled sadly. "Why, she looked a bit like you, Daenerys." He bowed low. "Sleep well, my queen."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes--that could be a parallel. Unless some backstory turns up about Mance as plucky runaway Targaryen boy who ended up with a raiding party to eventually be raised at the Wall (not impossible, but still . . . )--am thinking the red and black is at most an affectation for Mance. Who likes Jon. Hardly rock solid. But it is there . . .

ETA--didn't see the other red and black you listed before this message. Agree it's there. But back to LmL--the fire imagery is there, too. It just is--will have to be dealt with somehow.

I think there are some Mance-Rhaegar parallels. Some even take these parallels to mean that Mance is Rhaegar. I don't think that's the answer. Along with the relatively subtle Rhaegar connection, Mance's Abel guise quite obviously echoes Bael the Bard. Is it a coincidence that Mance has links to these two characters? I don't think so. What do (we think) those two have in common? Blue roses and Stark girls who gave birth to their sons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hadn't quite thought that far... But if Jon is born after Robert took the throne, then he can't be royalty as his family was no longer royalty. The Baratheons were the royal family by that point. Jon would be of royalty through his father as his father was a prince, but not royalty himself as his family is no longer royalty. He can't be born a king if his family does not have a kingship to pass on.

This could then equally apply to Joffrey. While Joffrey is no son of Robert's, he is still the son of royalty as his mother is the lawful queen of Westoros due to her marriage to the king of Westoros. Joffrey is of royal blood, but he's not royalty himself.

But the possibility that they're both bastards would also seem to work. Jon can still be Rhaegar's son whether he's trueborn or not

Not only that, but Rhaegar wasn't even the heir anymore. Jon would still be in line after Dany, right? Actually, how does that work? Only Dorne recognizes queens as rulers, correct?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but wait a moment, because Jorah wore Lynesse's favor before the tourney even started.

Not exact parallels, but Martin is making the point of the driven nature of love/desire.

Rhaegar, like Jorah didn't win a lot of tourneys either, which would also play into the impetuous nature of what he did, leading right up to blindly riding past his wife, and uncaring that his actions would be viewed as an insult by all, including perhaps Lyanna herself.

"The things we do for love," "love is the death of duty," and "conflicts of the heart."

Tie that into the blue rose symbolism of Lyannas unattainability, a reflection of the agony and frustration on Rhaegars part.

Rhaegars choice of the flower is a hint to his own feelings beyond the authors choice of how to depict a Stark maiden.

I mean I'm sorry, but the book is written in the blood of desperate men.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding mysteries...

R+L=J is a theory, however, Jon's TRUE parentage is a mystery.

Here is George, Elio and Linda visiting SF-Bokhandeln

Begin @ 42:38

Linda: As an author when you introduce a mystery that you want to leave ambiguous, do you have the answer yourself all the time, or do you leave it ambiguous to yourself as well?

George: The vast majority of cases I know the answers to, things like, who killed Jon Arryn and all of that. Sometimes the answer when I unfolded in the book, I try to do it fairly subtly. I don't tend to write the classic detective scene where, everybody gets together in one room, and he says, "And here are all the clues, that I put them together, because I'm Ellery Queen or Sherlock Holmes or whatever, and or Poirot, and here what my little grey cells have told me." But the answer is there if the reader is paying attention and you can put it together yourself.

Yes, and before ASOS it was almost a fact that Cersei killed Jon Arryn. It made sense, there were clues about it. It was perfect. Any other theory required some sort of mental gymnastic. Yes, there were clues about Lysa+LF, but you had to made a lot of assumption to connect Lysa and LF and Jon Arryn murder.

Elio said he was also proven wrong about LF when ASOS came out. If I understood correctly he believed in a Grand unified conspiracy theory. And he was not a casual reader. And GRRM did the whole 'everybody gets together in one room'. Lysa explained the whole mystery in one monologue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd also be careful about throwing around labels that people are going to make themselves look silly or can't read the text as carefully as you seem to think that you do, while continuing to try and say that if Jon is trueborn he's a king... Jon is born in all likelihood after Robert was king. The Targaryens were no longer kings and being the trueborn son of Rhaegar doesn't change the fact that the Baratheons were the royal family at that point.

Interesting take on the timing. It seems accepted here that Jon was born around the time of the Sack.

Which is strange, because the KG would have no idea if Jon was king right at that point in time. Even if they knew about Rhaegar's death, until they got news that Aerys was dead, and baby "Aegon's" head was smashed in, there were still two more in line before whatever baby Lyanna had, if male.

And then there is the problem with Aerys naming Viserys heir, which makes "Lyanna's son by Rhaegar" even further down the line.

ETA but you're correct that all that is down the drain once Robert wins the throne

Man, there are more and more psychic powers the KG has to have in order to name the mystery baby King.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys are already working from the conclusion that Rhaegar is Jon's father and what he did was some romantic gesture.So every arguement relies on an element in dispute.Let me explain further.

I'm struggling with this. Why should Rhaegar's actions have been a romantic gesture for this to work? That detail is entirely unnecessary for the parallel. That's one reading of it. Perhaps Rhaegar didn't know of the Bael the Bard story, and the Starks did; Rhaegar meant it as a romantic gesture, not knowing he was insulting the Starks. Alternatively, perhaps Rhaegar DID know, and was making an intentional insult for reasons we don't yet know, and he later followed through with the implied threat. Or later decided that he needed to make babies with a woman he'd previously insulted. Perhaps neither Rhaegar nor the Starks knew the Bael story at all because GRRM hadn't thought of it yet.

What we know from the legend. Bael did not kidnap the Stark maiden, she never left.

what he did take was her virginity unasked.He deflowered so he replaced what he took with something he considered just as rare. His reasons for his actions was to humiliate Lord Stark

Bael abducted the Stark Maiden. The distance he took her is not relevant, he took her away from her family and got her preggers. Notably from the Stark viewpoint, both the Bael story and the Rhaegar story are stories of abduction, yet in both we are given hints that the Stark maiden involved may have had -- or come to have -- positive feelings towards her abductor.

Bael's intent is an interesting subject though. It may have no bearing on Rhaegar. Bael is not Rhaegar and maybe the two of them did what they did for entirely different reasons, and it's only the things they did and the symbolism associated with it that are parallel. On the other hand, maybe this hints at something so far hidden to us. It certainly does seem as if Brandon Stark was outraged by the blue winter rose "gift" at Harrenhal just as Brandon Stark was outraged by the blue winter rose "gift" at Winterfell.

The fact is that GRRM told us a story about a Stark maiden being abducted by someone who left blue winter roses. Then later he told us another story about a Stark maiden being abducted by someone who left a blue winter rose. It's stretching credibility to believe that the author did not intend these two stories to be considered close parallels. There is interesting scope for us to discuss how close the parallel is, and that's where questions can arise about Bael's intent vs. Rhaegar's. The parallel itself, and the fact that it is unique to Bael and Rhaegar, can't really sensibly be denied.

King Monkey I am looking forward to your essay.

It's coming along well, but tough going. Near 2 decades of rubble is an awful lot to sort through. I'm taking bets with myself which side will hate it more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting take on the timing. It seems accepted here that Jon was born around the time of the Sack.

Which is strange, because the KG would have no idea if Jon was king right at that point in time. Even if they knew about Rhaegar's death, until they got news that Aerys was dead, and baby "Aegon's" head was smashed in, there were still two more in line before whatever baby Lyanna had, if male.

And then there is the problem with Aerys naming Viserys heir, which makes "Lyanna's son by Rhaegar" even further down the line.

ETA but you're correct that all that is down the drain once Robert wins the throne

Man, there are more and more psychic powers the KG has to have in order to name the mystery baby King.

KG considered Robert as a usurper. So for them it doesn't matter if Robert is a king. For them he is a rebel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, and before ASOS it was almost a fact that Cersei killed Jon Arryn. It made sense, there were clues about it. It was perfect. Any other theory required some sort of mental gymnastic. Yes, there were clues about Lysa+LF, but you had to made a lot of assumption to connect Lysa and LF and Jon Arryn murder.

Elio said he was also proven wrong about LF when ASOS came out. If I understood correctly he believed in a Grand unified conspiracy theory. And he was not a casual reader. And GRRM did the whole 'everybody gets together in one room'. Lysa explained the whole mystery in one monologue.

There may have been truth in the lie that the Lannisters killed Jon Arryn,

Jon Arryn and Stannis looking in to Robert's bastards led them to the twincest, Jon was going to send sweetrobin to foster with Stannis--- that decision's relation to the discovery is not spelled out other than their proximity.

If the twincest was behind Jon Arryn fostering sweetrobin with Stannis and Lysa poisoned him because he was going to take sweetrobin away from her. then the Lannisters were behind Jon Arryn getting poisoned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KG considered Robert as a usurper. So for them it doesn't matter if Robert is a king. For them he is a rebel.

I'm not sure this is a proper parallel, considering Jaime's murder of Aerys and Barristan bending the knee and serving Robert. Both also KG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're the kings whether or not they should have been. The point is that lawfully they're not supposed to be if they're not who they're said to be. Joffrey was the king because people said he was, but the king should be Stannis as he's Robert's next of kin. Stannis is the rightful king, Joffrey is the one who people believe is and therefore treat as such.

I'd also be careful about throwing around labels that people are going to make themselves look silly or can't read the text as carefully as you seem to think that you do, while continuing to try and say that if Jon is trueborn he's a king... Jon is born in all likelihood after Robert was king. The Targaryens were no longer kings and being the trueborn son of Rhaegar doesn't change the fact that the Baratheons were the royal family at that point.

Hightower, Whent and Dayne did not agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same here. I was 100% Cersei killed Jon Arryn and I still think RLJ is a very strong theory.

I started reading ASOIAF more than a decade ago and last week I was arguing with someone on reddit that Arthur Dayne as a father doesn't make any sense. But Parris statement about RLJ was bugging me for years. And there's something about Daynes. So I was not 100% on RLJ, but I was still pretty much convinced. But this week I read something about Dany, Jon and Stannis that made me think about the whole thing. And I was a firm believer in RLJ for 10 years! And now I am not sure. I still believe R+L=J makes more sense then alternative. We have more text about it. But that doesn't mean R+L=J is a fact. There are alternatives, and RLJ could be a red herring. Just like Cersei killing Jon Arryn was a red herring.

Agreed on RLJ not being fact. My own personal prejudice--could never see the point of throwing down on a theory before the books are done. So I've never been 100% on RLJ. Maybe 75% to 80%. Because the story has so many holes to fill in to make it work. Because I can't figure out what to do with the Daynes and the Sword of the Morning and Dawn that Martin insists on bringing in. Because the books aren't done.

I'm a bit more sold on Ned and Ashara as the red herring--stronger hints that a reader still has to figure out but then Martin shows as a false misdirect--seems a bit more classic. But the holes in RLJ are hard to ignore. Just as the strengths of RLJ can't be dismissed. And given the precedent of Arryn's murder--a sharp misdirect is possible. Though given all of the symbolism--I think that sharp of a twist will be harder to pull off. Not impossible by any means. But harder.

Bottom line: Books ain't done. Lots still on the table. Should be a great read--and hopefully no more weird monologues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where are you getting this from? It's surely not from A Game of Thrones.

"Woe to the Usurper if we had been, said Ser Oswell.

When Kings Landing fell, Ser Jaime slew your king with a golden sword, and I wondered where you were.

Far away, Ser Gerold said, or Aerys would yet sit the Iron Throne, and our false brother would burn in seven hells."

They acknowledge that Robert is now the king of Westoros.

No, they did not.

“I came down on Storm’s End to lift the siege,” Ned told them, “and the Lords Tyrell and Redwyne dipped their banners, and all their knights bent the knee to pledge us fealty. I was certain you would be among them.”

Our knees do not bend easily,” said Ser Arthur Dayne.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1.I'm struggling with this. Why should Rhaegar's actions have been a romantic gesture for this to work? That detail is entirely unnecessary for the parallel. That's one reading of it. Perhaps Rhaegar didn't know of the Bael the Bard story, and the Starks did; Rhaegar meant it as a romantic gesture, not knowing he was insulting the Starks. Alternatively, perhaps Rhaegar DID know, and was making an intentional insult for reasons we don't yet know, and he later followed through with the implied threat. Or later decided that he needed to make babies with a woman he'd previously insulted. Perhaps neither Rhaegar nor the Starks knew the Bael story at all because GRRM hadn't thought of it yet.

2.Bael abducted the Stark Maiden. The distance he took her is not relevant, he took her away from her family and got her preggers. Notably from the Stark viewpoint, both the Bael story and the Rhaegar story are stories of abduction, yet in both we are given hints that the Stark maiden involved may have had -- or come to have -- positive feelings towards her abductor.

Bael's intent is an interesting subject though. It may have no bearing on Rhaegar. Bael is not Rhaegar and maybe the two of them did what they did for entirely different reasons, and it's only the things they did and the symbolism associated with it that are parallel. On the other hand, maybe this hints at something so far hidden to us. It certainly does seem as if Brandon Stark was outraged by the blue winter rose "gift" at Harrenhal just as Brandon Stark was outraged by the blue winter rose "gift" at Winterfell.

The fact is that GRRM told us a story about a Stark maiden being abducted by someone who left blue winter roses. Then later he told us another story about a Stark maiden being abducted by someone who left a blue winter rose. It's stretching credibility to believe that the author did not intend these two stories to be considered close parallels. There is interesting scope for us to discuss how close the parallel is, and that's where questions can arise about Bael's intent vs. Rhaegar's. The parallel itself, and the fact that it is unique to Bael and Rhaegar, can't really sensibly be denied.

It's coming along well, but tough going. Near 2 decades of rubble is an awful lot to sort through. I'm taking bets with myself which side will hate it more.

1.I think he bolded might be a typo i'm not sure.What i was saying and i'm sorry i've been posting on my phone so i may have forgotten a word or two ,but the red bolded is my point.I think he did know exactly what he was doing A man as bookish as him i would guess he knew about the Bael the Bard tale.But there was noting for him to go through with because it wasn't a threat.

2. I would agree with you King monkey,but the text says otherwise.Watch this i think you would find it interesting.

"And so it was done. But when morning come, the singer had vanished . . . and so had Lord Brandon's maiden daughter. Her bed they found empty, but for the pale blue rose that Bael had left on the pillow where her head had lain."<snip>

He followed the sound and found his daughter back in her bedchamber, asleep with a babe at her breast."

"Bael had brought her back?""No. They had been in Winterfell all the time, hiding with the dead beneath the castle.

The maid vanished,Bael vanished-------Where do you get he abducted her from?

He didn't abduct her,nor did she leave with him she was hiding in the crypts.He actually had nothing to do with her disappearence.Culturally i would think she getting knocked up and not married probably had to do with her hiding......Shame/dishonor.

But again this notion that Bael abducted her is wrong!!!

Share this post


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

×