Jump to content

Archived

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

SFDanny

R+L=J v147

Recommended Posts

Maybe a little more of that story is in order

Okay--I'm jet-lagged and on a train and am pretty sure I'm not following where you're trying to get to with this. Are you implying what Alia of the Knife is arguing about above? If not--just treat me like an idiot and say it flat out. I'm way too tired to be remotely offended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

:agree:

Even though explanation for Arthur Dayne+Lyanna and Ned's respect for someone who broke a vow would require one hell of a monologue :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

He didn't abduct her,not did she leave with him she was hiding

And I can't help it but I also see

A blue rose, given as a gift to Bael, exchanged for a maiden who hid within her home with Bael, then a baby given in payment to the Lord for having deflowered the Maiden

as very different from

A Prince publicly giving a Stark maiden roses that he did not get as a gift nor exchange for her while hiding within her home and not giving the Lord a payment

Not to mention killing the father thing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Agree on the the Mance and Rhaegar parallels--bards, roses--all of it. Don't think Mance actually fathered a Stark bastard, though. And maybe Rhaegar didn't, either. But he definitely sang and gave Lyanna that crown--whatever his motive. No way around it.

So for now--Rhaegar is still the strongest candidate (at least in my own head) for the Bael the bard parallel and being the father of Lyanna's child. Won't pretend I can ignore other possibilities, but Rhaegar's still strongest on this score.

Edited for spelling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can acknowledge that someone is a king, without acknowledging that they're your king. They said that Robert is now the king of Westoros and that the Targaryens no longer sit the Iron Throne. They then said that they won't pay him fealty. That doesn't mean that he's not the king though and that Jon is. He doesn't have a kingdom to be a king of as Robert is now king of Westoros by the Kingsguards own words.

Fealty = acknowledging for something. They did not swore fealty to Robert as the king of Westeros.

Barristan swore fealty to Robert, he acknowledge Robert as the king.

Hightower, Whent and Dayne, did not. Their fealty was claimed by Jon, a trueborn.

The Redwyne and Tyrell armies could've fought and died to the death defending the crown (Targaryen dynasty), but they chose to bend 'easily' to a new proclaimed king. This was the exact opposite of the 3 Kingsguards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even though explanation for Arthur Dayne+Lyanna and Ned's respect for someone who broke a vow would require one hell of a monologue :)

:agree: Amen. And possibly visual aids and an interpretive dance--who knows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

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.

:agree: :agree: :agree:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:agree: Amen. And possibly visual aids and an interpretive dance--who knows.

Lol! @interpretive dance!

I have no clue, I feel like I change my mind about it frequently. I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me why Rhaegar would have embarrassed his wife and crowned Lyanna. Not being contrarian, I really want to know what people believe the explanation is, because I think despite whatever his feelings were for Lyanna, he respected Elia. She was still the mother of his children.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fealty = acknowledging for something. They did not swore fealty to Robert as the king of Westeros.

Barristan swore fealty to Robert, he acknowledge Robert as the king.

Hightower, Whent and Dayne, did not. Their fealty was claimed by Jon, a trueborn.

The Redwyne and Tyrell armies could've fought and died to the death defending the crown (Targaryen dynasty), but they chose to bend 'easily' to a new proclaimed king. This was the exact opposite of the 3 Kingsguards.

You're 100% right imo, the fact that they didn't kneel means they don't acknowledge Robert as king. Their vows, which they are stressing at the moment, require their loyalty to the king. Ergo, they do not view Robert as the rightful king.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I can't help it but I also see

A blue rose, given as a gift to Bael, exchanged for a maiden who hid within her home with Bael, then a baby given in payment to the Lord for having deflowered the Maiden

as very different from

A Prince publicly giving a Stark maiden roses that he did not get as a gift nor exchange for her while hiding within her home and not giving the Lord a payment

Not to mention killing the father thing

the wall, a bastard son made the Lord of Winterfell, father dead for protecting his child, son betrayed and killed

and

the wall, a bastard son made the Lord of Winterfell, father dead for protecting his child, son betrayed and killed

One of those includes a blue rose

the other includes Jon.

The tale of Bael and the blue rose shares several key elements with the tale of Jon Snow, Ned's bastard.

Jon and Bael climbed the wall

Jon and Bael stole a woman

Bael lived in the crypts--- Jon dreams of the crypts

The woman Bale stole died after her people attacked him--- the woman Jon stole died after her people attacked him,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're just going to have to disagree here as this just isn't going to go anywhere while you choose to ignore what the characters themselves say regarding whether or not Robert was king of Westoros:

"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.

The statement you are standing on here is "or Aerys would yet sit the iron throne."

What they seem to be saying is that a "usurper" (how they refer to Robert) sits the Iron Throne. The man sitting the Iron Throne is a "usurper," meaning "not the rightful king." They didn't bend their knees, because they don't consider Robert king - he's the usurper. How confusing is this?

It's only confusing if you want to make it confusing. It's very clear. With all due respect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jon/Rhaegar:

"Wrong to love her, wrong to leave her,,,,"

I speculate that as Rhaegar lay dying, that is what he was thinking, even as whispered Lyas name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

No typo. It's all a possibility. I was responding to your using this as a counter to the romantic element, as if the romantic element was a requirement for the parallel. My apologies if I misconstrued your point.

"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?

Abduction does not necessarily imply a lack of consent. Yes, this does at first sound strange. We are talking about the top of a highly stratified society, where a very large part of a daughter's (and to a lesser extent a son's) value was in their marriage. Stark maidens don't get to wander off with whoever they like, their marriage is a gift of their Lord father to dispense. To take a daughter of a noble family without the consent of her father would be considered abduction.

In the case of Bael the Bard, the simple fact that the Stark Maiden left with him and without her father's blessing is enough for it to be considered abduction, whether she went willingly or not. This was a common view in medieval jurisprudence. In a number of countries today, Bael's actions would make him legally guilty of abduction.

Unless you're contending that the Stark Maiden's disappearance had nothing to do with Bael -- which I'm sure you're not -- the abduction can't be called into question. There is however a big question of whether it was a consensual abduction. With the obvious caveat that the version of the story we get is from a pro-Bael perspective, it certainly would appear that she did consent, at least eventually. This is an interesting point, and I propose this implies that we should consider Lyanna's "abduction" in that same light.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gang: keep the topic derails to a minimum, please, and if you can't agree with another poster on something, keep it civil. No need to call anyone names or insult their intelligence. This is, after all, a hypothesis, not the theory of gravity.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jon/Rhaegar:

"Wrong to love her, wrong to leave her,,,,"

I speculate that as Rhaegar lay dying, that is what he was thinking, even as whispered Lyas name.

Also...

Ygritte was much in his thoughts as well. He remembered the smell of her hair, the warmth of her body … and the look on her face as she slit the old man’s throat. You were wrong to love her, a voice whispered. You were wrong to leave her, a different voice insisted. He wondered if his father had been torn the same way, when he’d left Jon’s mother to return to Lady Catelyn. He was pledged to Lady Stark, and I am pledged to the Night’s Watch.

**Pledging is a swearing of vows. Martin italicized it for its importance. Jon pledged himself in front of a weirdwood tree. Just as I conclude, Rhaegar did with a certain Lady Stark, Lyanna.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also...

Ygritte was much in his thoughts as well. He remembered the smell of her hair, the warmth of her body and the look on her face as she slit the old mans throat. You were wrong to love her, a voice whispered. You were wrong to leave her, a different voice insisted. He wondered if his father had been torn the same way, when hed left Jons mother to return to Lady Catelyn. He was pledged to Lady Stark, and I am pledged to the Nights Watch.

**Pledging is a swearing of vows. Martin italicized it for its importance. Jon pledged himself in front of a weirdwood tree. Just as I conclude, Rhaegar did with a certain Lady Stark, Lyanna.

Exactly. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol! @interpretive dance!

I have no clue, I feel like I change my mind about it frequently. I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me why Rhaegar would have embarrassed his wife and crowned Lyanna. Not being contrarian, I really want to know what people believe the explanation is, because I think despite whatever his feelings were for Lyanna, he respected Elia. She was still the mother of his children.

Oh--questioning that isn't contrarian. Seems like common sense. There's no real explanation in the texts at present. I certainly can't explain that without making Rhaegar look at least foolish. Romantic gesture, insult to the Starks, declaration of claiming Lyanna for a prophecy, giving the wreath because Arthur wanted Lyanna to have it--all of these scenarios have Rhaegar being foolish at best.

We know he gave that wreath. Period. Why? To be determined. Maybe there will be a version that makes Rhaegar unfoolish. But can't help but think that when he talks of paths not taken, of wanting to make changes--think there's a chance that's not just about changing some of the governance. He might be somewhat acknowledging that he's made mistakes. Maybe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that they don't consider that Robert should be king. But if someone tries to say that Dayne, Hightower, and Whent say that Robert was not king of Westoros, then they're writing fanfiction. All Dayne, Hightower, and Whent say is that they won't bend the knee to Ned and Robert. They readily acknowledge that he is the king though. They just don't accept him.

No, they do not acknowledge him as king, only that he sits in the chair. They call him a usurper, and do not kneel. That means they consider him someone who is not the king, and sits in the chair anyway.

Easy on the "fan fiction" accusation. What they literally say is that Aerys would still sit in the chair if they had been in KL or at the Trident. That is not an acknowledgment of his being the king now. So, the original statement which started this debate, which was that the three KG disagree about who is the rightful king, is correct, as far as I can tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jon/Rhaegar:

"Wrong to love her, wrong to leave her,,,,"

I speculate that as Rhaegar lay dying, that is what he was thinking, even as whispered Lyas name.

Absolutely possible. And, given a lot of the symbolism, Jon is tied to the Targaryens. And text at least shows Rhaegar and Lyanna noticing each other--there's a link. Lots of gaps--but a link to start with.

Would only add that if Arthur were the father--Arthur could easily have thought the same sorts of things . . . Not anywhere near as much evidence as Rhaegar. No actual meeting of any sort given in the text. No where near as strong as Rhaegar. But, in a strictly hypothetical sense, am the thinking could be the same if Arthur loved Lyanna. . . .

Edited for clarity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely possible. And, given a lot of the symbolism, Jon is tied to the Targaryens. And text at least shows Rhaegar and Lyanna noticing each other--there's a link. Lots of gaps--but a link to start with.

Would only add that if Arthur were the father--Arthur could easily have thought the same sorts of things . . . Not anywhere near as much evidence as Rhaegar. No actual meeting of any sort given in the text. No where near as strong as Rhaegar. But, in a strictly hypothetical sense, am the thinking could be the same if Arthur loved Lyanna. . . .

Edited for clarity.

If Lyanna confessed to Ned that she and Arthur have married, and that Jon is their son, that would be against all of the things Ned thought about Arthur, the greatest of all the Kingsguards. For Ned, Arthur would be an oathbreaker, not some shining example.

And there is no reason for Ned to hide Jon's true parentage from him and claiming that he is his son. Something that he certainly wanted to tell Jon when he was locked in the dark cells.

Share this post


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

×