Jump to content

Archived

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

SFDanny

R+L=J v147

Recommended Posts

It's true that roses have a feminine association, no doubt. But this can easily still apply to Jon, who has Stark blood through his mother; female line. Also, I'm not so sure how hung up I'd get on the flower = female idea in a series that is partially inspired by the Wars of the Roses.

We know what the blood means -- bed of blood, which means birthing bed -- and we know what the roses mean. Blood and roses = Lyanna gave birth to Rhaegar's child.

Jstar honestly you lost me,that would be true if GRRM didn't set the context and he has.Niether negates Lyanna from being Jon's mother.I believe 100% that this is the case,so you get no arguement.However that bit of equation at the end through me Blood and roses=Lyanna gave birth to Rhaegar's child.I don't know how you got there.

I get that Rhaegar laid a crown of roses in Lya's lap.That gesture by him doesn't equate exclusivelya romantic one or that he is the father of Lya's baby.This is where we are at cross purposes and that is our interpretation of that show by Rhaegar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah i am hip to the Mithras imagery surrounding Jon,i get all the king myths surrounding Jon.Hence the reason i can say Jon has many paths he can follow.I could say i have an idea but because i recognize most the myths GRRM has used Its still a toss up where he'll go,But its most likely going to end with Jon being a sacrifice.

The point is that Jon is dragon aspected, like all the other solar kings I mentioned, all of whom "took" a fire and ice bride, in some way, as I was saying.

When I say "the pattern is _____" I take it that we both understand that is an assertion, a hypothesis, not a statement of fact. I'm not a crazy person. Of course I could be wrong about anything I am asserting. I figure it's sufficient to occasionally add the qualifiers and everyone understands we are talking hypothesis. :) Th solar king and two moon maidens is the pattern I have seen, of course based on the two moon idea.

For example, I would modify Schmendrick's equation a bit. The original Lightbringer was forged by a sun / comet and a fire moon (hypothesis), resulting in a fire sword, Lightbringer (which is not Dawn according to me). What we have left is one half of that comet from the Dawn Age, and an Ice moon (hypothesis). When the comet hits that ice moon in the next two books (one of my few big, testable predictions) as the Qarthine myth predicts, the result of that union will be symbolically equivalent to Jon Snow. Jon is the son of the solar king and the ice moon maiden, Lyanna, so he actually symbolizes the "new" Lightbringer, if you will, an event which has not happened yet. I think that is why he is the prince who was promised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jstar honestly you lost me,that would be true if GRRM didn't set the context and he has.Niether negates Lyanna from being Jon's mother.I believe 100% that this is the case,so you get no arguement.However that bit of equation at the end through me Blood and roses=Lyanna gave birth to Rhaegar's child.I don't know how you got there.

I get that Rhaegar laid a crown of roses in Lya's lap.That gesture by him doesn't equate exclusivelya romantic one or that he is the father of Lya's baby.This is where we are at cross purposes and that is our interpretation of that show by Rhaegar.

Jon's a Stark (has Stark blood) on his mother's side. This is relevant since we're told he's a Stark through his would be father, Ned. That's part of the surprise regarding his parentage. He's still a Stark, but through his mother, not his father.

ETA: I'm not really sure what's not clear about the WotR reference. They are known to have been one of the big influences for ASoIaF. The roses there did not have a feminine connotation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jstar honestly you lost me,that would be true if GRRM didn't set the context and he has.Niether negates Lyanna from being Jon's mother.I believe 100% that this is the case,so you get no arguement.However that bit of equation at the end through me Blood and roses=Lyanna gave birth to Rhaegar's child.I don't know how you got there.

I get that Rhaegar laid a crown of roses in Lya's lap.That gesture by him doesn't equate exclusivelya romantic one or that he is the father of Lya's baby.This is where we are at cross purposes and that is our interpretation of that show by Rhaegar.

Why can't you get that bed of blood or bloody bed for a woman means she just recently gave birth?

“The gods made men to fight, and women to bear children,” said Randyll Tarly. “A woman’s war is in the birthing bed.”

**In war people bleed and die, on the battle field is where Men belong, for women it's in the birthing bed, according to Randyll Tarly (a Southern warrior). Martin established that clearly, in his world of asoiaf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why can't you get that bed of blood or bloody bed for a woman means she just recently gave birth?

“The gods made men to fight, and women to bear children,” said Randyll Tarly. “A woman’s war is in the birthing bed.”

**In war people bleed and die, on the battle field is where Men belong, for women it's in the birthing bed, according to Randyll Tarly (a Southern warrior). Martin established that clearly, in his world of asoiaf.

Exactly. I'm pretty sure she knows how I got there, since I explained it in the post she responded to. Or did I really need to also say that Rhaegar famously gave Lyanna a crown of winter roses? Blood and roses = Lyanna gave birth to Rhaegar's child.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously though, The two Stark girls with POVs are not associated with the blue roses? The Starks of Winterfell. The Winterfell where they grow blue roses. Winter roses as blue as frost. Northern roses. Hmmmmm.

Please. Neither Sansa nor Arya are associated with blue roses because no-one makes such a connection in the text. Ever.

And what of the blue flower in Daenerys' vision? No one is pegged into that hole yet. It could be past or future.

A child of the union of someone associated with blue roses and the man who gave them to her.

How are Bael and Rhaegar the same? Bael was a wildling and a raider, and later a King, who scaled the Wall and stole the Stark Maiden. Years later he was slain by his own son. There is the tale of stealing a Stark maiden and a musician but the rest don't line up.

To the latter part of your post, there is the Marillion who also tries to take the Stark maiden, Sansa. Oh! Then there is Tom O'Sevens who captures Arya.

ETA to say these other guys; Bael, Tom, Marillion, even Mance are, definitely ladies men. They love the ladies. Rhaegar has not been painted in that light.

The idea of Tom spending a time in hiding with Arya and impregnating her is rather creepy, and Marillion with Sansa just so.

BTW, why is the fact that Lancelot had a son supposed to be a support for Lyanna+Arthur? Lancelot slept with Guenevere but fathered a child on Eliaaine.

ETA: Forgot to adress this one:

And yes, Lyanna has her blue roses, but what of it? Not following the single rose and multiple roses to queen of love and beauty.

I meant that every time Lyanna is referred in connection with blue roses, the roses, plural, actually stand for the QoLaB crown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why can't you get that bed of blood or bloody bed for a woman means she just recently gave birth?

“The gods made men to fight, and women to bear children,” said Randyll Tarly. “A woman’s war is in the birthing bed.”

**In war people bleed and die, on the battle field is where Men belong, for women it's in the birthing bed, according to Randyll Tarly (a Southern warrior). Martin established that clearly, in his world of asoiaf.

“Before,” Dany said to the ugly Lhazareen woman, “I heard you speak of birthing songs …”

“I know every secret of the bloody bed, Silver Lady, nor have I ever lost a babe,” Mirri Maz Duur replied.

“My time is near,” Dany said. “I would have you attend me when he comes, if you would.” (AGOT, Daenerys)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please. Neither Sansa nor Arya are associated with blue roses because no-one makes such a connection in the text. Ever.

A child of the union of someone associated with blue roses and the man who gave them to her.

Let's remember that not everyting in Dany HoTU vision directly relates to her. The feast of wolf corpses didn't directly affect her at all - only in a general "Westeros was less table if she ever gets there to invade" kind if way. The blue rose in her vision does not mean Dany has to marry Jon or anything like that. I do think it seems likely they will interact in som significant way, but I just thought I would remind everyone. Let's not get caught up on the Dany end of it - the important thing is the vision itself, which can only be explained (my opinion) by R+L=J. As you point out, the other Stark girls just don't have any blue roses in their scenes. That's not an accident (my opinion).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jstar honestly you lost me,that would be true if GRRM didn't set the context and he has.Niether negates Lyanna from being Jon's mother.I believe 100% that this is the case,so you get no arguement.However that bit of equation at the end through me Blood and roses=Lyanna gave birth to Rhaegar's child.I don't know how you got there.

I get that Rhaegar laid a crown of roses in Lya's lap.That gesture by him doesn't equate exclusivelya romantic one or that he is the father of Lya's baby.This is where we are at cross purposes and that is our interpretation of that show by Rhaegar.

Then why is Lyanna repeatedly depicted as wearing the crown that Rhaegar gave her?

Promise me, Ned,” Lyanna’s statue whispered. She wore a garland of pale blue roses, and her eyes wept blood.

Ned remembered the moment when all the smiles died, when Prince Rhaegar Targaryen urged his horse past his own wife, the Dornish princess Elia Martell, to lay the queen of beauty’s laurel in Lyanna’s lap. He could see it still: a crown of winter roses, blue as frost.

Ned Stark reached out his hand to grasp the flowery crown, but beneath the pale blue petals the thorns lay hidden. He felt them clawing at his skin, sharp and cruel, saw the slow trickle of blood run down his fingers, and woke, trembling, in the dark.

Promise me, Ned, his sister had whispered from her bed of blood. She had loved the scent of winter roses.

But there were others with faces he had never known in life, faces he had seen only in stone. The slim, sad girl who wore a crown of pale blue roses and a white gown spattered with gore could only be Lyanna.

Note how all three extract contain the same elements - the crown of the blue roses is repeatedly connected with the (bed of) blood, as well as "promise me", further connecting to Ned's memory of Lyanna extracting the promise in a room that smelled of blood and roses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, why is the fact that Lancelot had a son supposed to be a support for Lyanna+Arthur? Lancelot slept with Guenevere but fathered a child on Eliaaine.

Oh--that's probably directed at me. Post #72 above:

I was pointing out that although the Bael the Bard rose story does work very well with Rhaegar, even that symbolism isn't a trump card, especially with the books' not being finished.

The basics:

Rhaegar sings, Lyanna cries, Rhaegar gives wreath to Lyanna (reasons to be determined), Rhaegar and companions (including Arthur) take Lyanna (reason to be determined), all same as Bae. Twist: Arthur and Lyanna become lovers (reason to be determined) and Arthur=daddy. The rest stays the same, and Jon=blue rose at ice Wall.

I threw in that it has a bit of an Arthur, Lancelot, Gwen vibe--like you said, in Mallory and other places, Lance doesn't get Gwen pregnant. But Martin rarely runs his parallels straight--potential baby would be a twist. Could also explain the tower of joy reference. And with the theories that the Daynes look a bit Valyrian and are such an old house--might be able to squeeze in the dragon dreams . . .

No where near set up well enough to hold yet. Really think Rhaegar's the cleaner line--fewer twists, already have misdirects from RLJ via Ned and Wylla and Ned and Ashara to act as the red herrings. And although Arthur very likely would have been with Rhaegar during the "running off," we have hints in the texts that Rhaegar and Lyanna at least noticed each other (context and feelings to be determined). We don't have that with Arthur--just symbols, hints at the sword--it's vague. . .

Bottom line: I think the blue rose reads cleanest and easiest as Jon=Rhaegar and Lyanna's kid. But it isn't a trump card--other ways (not as clean, but at least workable) to get the same image. Until the books are done, nothing is really a trump card.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I definitely agree that Martin tends to leave himself room to fulfill his foreshadowing in a variety of ways. And I understand the scenario you're proposing, but what's the evidence for it, symbolic or otherwise? I get that Lancelot is supposed to have a kid, that's a good place to start looking for things in the text to corroborated the hypothesis. I guess we'll see what the heretics can come up with for that scenario... And certainly the books aren't finished...

Still, we do not have anything close to a viable blue rose explanation other than Lyanna being Jon's mother. The fact that the blue roses appear nowhere else but the places they do is really hard to argue against, IMO.

My original point was this: RLJ been out 15 years, and still no convincing alternative to explain the clues and symbols has emerged. With all the smart people working on this... you get the idea. We'd have heard of it by now.

Then, we have the wealth of dragon and King imagery around Jon. We just talked about all the King stuff, with some really nice additions by IceFire125, but the dragon stuff is equally present. The heaviest imagery around Jon is the Azor Ahai / dragon imagery, often depicted in red and black, followed closely by his Other imagery, which I highlighted on the last RLJ thread. His blood is absolutely special, it's just what everyone says and what everyone is probably sick of hearing : he really is the union of fire and ice. The song of fire and ice.

Count me among those who think the Starks do have Other blood. It's literally everywhere when you start looking for it.

You are being way too logical. Contrarians don't care about logic -- they just want to be contrary.

Oh--that's probably directed at me. Post #72 above:

I was pointing out that although the Bael the Bard rose story does work very well with Rhaegar, even that symbolism isn't a trump card, especially with the books' not being finished.

The basics:

Rhaegar sings, Lyanna cries, Rhaegar gives wreath to Lyanna (reasons to be determined), Rhaegar and companions (including Arthur) take Lyanna (reason to be determined), all same as Bae. Twist: Arthur and Lyanna become lovers (reason to be determined) and Arthur=daddy. The rest stays the same, and Jon=blue rose at ice Wall.

I threw in that it has a bit of an Arthur, Lancelot, Gwen vibe--like you said, in Mallory and other places, Lance doesn't get Gwen pregnant. But Martin rarely runs his parallels straight--potential baby would be a twist. Could also explain the tower of joy reference. And with the theories that the Daynes look a bit Valyrian and are such an old house--might be able to squeeze in the dragon dreams . . .

No where near set up well enough to hold yet. Really think Rhaegar's the cleaner line--fewer twists, already have misdirects from RLJ via Ned and Wylla and Ned and Ashara to act as the red herrings. And although Arthur very likely would have been with Rhaegar during the "running off," we have hints in the texts that Rhaegar and Lyanna at least noticed each other (context and feelings to be determined). We don't have that with Arthur--just symbols, hints at the sword--it's vague. . .

Bottom line: I think the blue rose reads cleanest and easiest as Jon=Rhaegar and Lyanna's kid. But it isn't a trump card--other ways (not as clean, but at least workable) to get the same image. Until the books are done, nothing is really a trump card.

It is about as close to a trump card as one can get in a piece of literature like this one. Your argument that Arthur could also fit because he accompanies Rhaegar in "taking" Lyanna is an incredibly weak argument. Arthur has no connection to the blue rose. He did not give the blue rose. He has never been mentioned as having any connection to a blue rose -- so there is absolutely no foreshadowing to support Arthur as being connected to the blue rose. Your "twist" analysis that the blue rose imagery "jumps" from Rhaegar to Arthur is just not a persuasive argument, and GRRM would have planted some clue to support that "leap" if he intended to go that way. He did not plant such a clue -- all the clues point to Rhaegar as the one associated with the blue rose -- so the chances of GRRM taking the approach that you suggest (yes, I acknowledge that you state that Rhaegar is the more likely candidate but you also state Arthur is a plausible alternative), IMHO, simply is not plausible (I suppose possible in the technical sense that "anything is possible" but certainly not plausible in any realistic sense).

Based on your standard of proof, I suppose we can form absolutely no conclusions. We must keep all possibilities open no matter how tenuous the argument. At some level, I suppose I agree with you. Until GRRM reveals the answer in a future book, we are all just making our own determinations of where we think the clues lead. But I also think we can use logical reasoning to conclude that no other explanation appears to be plausible given the evidence at hand. I agree that we should continue to examine all alternative theories with an open mind as they come up. But we also should be reasonable in discounting highly unlikely alternatives. The blue rose imagery "jumping" from Rhaegar to Arthur in the manner you posit simply is not persuasive (at least to me). There simply is no real evidence to support it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but the idea that everything is up in the air until the books are done just isn't going to find many converts. We have quite a bit left to learn, but we also have five books (and other sources) of information at our disposal, and R+L=J is as close to a sure thing as exists. Literally the only thing missing is the explicit statement in the books. No matter how sick of R+L=J some people are, it is not an obvious theory, and of the fraction of readers who know it, an even smaller fraction actually deduced it on their own.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on your standard of proof, I suppose we can form absolutely no conclusions. We must keep all possibilities open no matter how tenuous the argument.

Oh, no--that's not what I'm saying at all--sorry. My response was to a post early in the thread that seemed to imply that the rose metaphor is a trump card--absolute, no holds barred, no need of anything else proof of RLJ. Further books irrelevant, all figured out, no way Martin can possibly deviate--that kind of trump card. That's the mindset I was pushing against.

Arthur as daddy via being part of "running away" plot--it barely convinces me of its viability and I wrote it down. Only point--there are other ways to get to Jon=rose at Wall. Not nearly as clean as RLJ, but extant.

At some level, I suppose I agree with you. Until GRRM reveals the answer in a future book, we are all just making our own determinations of where we think the clues lead. But I also think we can use logical reasoning to conclude that no other explanation appears to be plausible given the evidence at hand.

This is much closer to what I meant--with the caveat that until the books are done, we can weigh evidence, argue that positions are stronger are weaker, even argue that many theories are unworkable. But the idea that any one theory can be proven absolutely true--until the books are done, can't see how that's viable.

Sorry, but the idea that everything is up in the air until the books are done just isn't going to find many converts. We have quite a bit left to learn, but we also have five books (and other sources) of information at our disposal, and R+L=J is as close to a sure thing as exists. Literally the only thing missing is the explicit statement in the books. No matter how sick of R+L=J some people are, it is not an obvious theory, and of the fraction of readers who know it, an even smaller fraction actually deduced it on their own.

Oh, no--not arguing "everything up in the air"--only that, with the books not done, completely throwing down on any theory still holds a risk of failure. A small risk, but a risk. Martin has options, even with RLJ--he just does.

As I said to LmL above--everyone reads differently. Which is exactly what makes discussions in the forums interesting. Throwing down on a theory about an unfinished work--not appealing to me. Can't see as it's viable. But arguing that some theories are much stronger than others--that completely works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's take a closer look at various Stark maidens' assocation with blue roses:

Sansa: nope

Arya: nope

unnamed Stark daughter: check

Lyanna: check

Let's extend this table a little.

Stark Daughter 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Sansa no no no sort of attempted no no no no

Arya no no attempted yes* no no no no

Unnamed yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes

Lyanna yes yes no yes yes yes yes? yes

(purple for partial matches)

* Different musician.

1. Personally associated with blue roses.

2. Blue roses presented to Starks by a musician who admires her.

3. Musician goes to Winterfell to gain Stark maiden.

4. Musician abducts Stark Maiden.

5. Musician is a king/prince

6. Stark called Brandon is outraged by the musician's actions.

7. Child of musician and Stark Maiden returned to the Starks.

8. Musician killed at a ford.

Sansa gets one partial hit, as Marillion attempts to have his way with her. Blue roses get no mention.

Arya gets two partial hits, one because Tom O'Sevens is one of the BwB who nabs her, which is a bit of a stretch but I'm being generous. The other because of Mance's attempt to replay the Bael legend. Blue roses get no mention.

Lyanna and the unnamed Stark Maiden from the Bael tale match very closely.

Bael leaves a blue winter rose for the Starks in exchange for the Stark Maiden. Rhaegar gives a crown of blue winter roses to Lyanna and later kidnaps her. In both cases, there's the suggestion of an exchange. The abductor lays a claim to the Stark Maiden in both cases by giving blue winter roses. Rhaegar places the crown in Lyanna's lap, Bael places the rose in the Stark Maiden's bed. In both cases, the "gift" of roses is granted a sexual connotation.

Bael is king-beyond-the-wall, Rhaegar is prince of Dragonstone. Despite their royal trappings, both seem to have a thing for acting as if they are wandering bards -- and are extremely good at it.

The Unnamed Stark Maiden's father is a Lord Brandon Stark. Rickard Stark was not present at Harrenhal, but Lyanna's brother Brandon Stark was standing in his stead there.

Rhaegar was killed at the Ruby Ford, Bael was killed at the Frozen Ford.

The son of the Stark Maiden and Bael is returned to the Starks. Assuming R+L=J, the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna was returned to the Starks.

Not included in the table, but a bonus: the son of the Stark Maiden and Bael became Lord of Winterfell, and then met his end at the hands of the Boltons. Jon was offered the lordship of Winterfell, and his stabbing was precipitated by the actions of the Boltons.

The only real lack of correspondence is that for Rhaegar, Harrenhall takes the place of Winterfell as scene of both the giving of the rose and the abduction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice work KingMonkey... I still need to comment on Eddard in wonderland, that was a terrific essay. Hats off to you

Bael's Bastard I'm in the same boat as you. we all know the books aren't done and that we can't be "sure" about anything, but with that said, there are five books worth of stuff to draw conclusions from, and with a mystery novel, you are NOT supposed to wait for the end to figure out what happened!! That's the whole point, of course, is to read the foreshadowing. The skilled mystery author leaves enough clues to put it together, but not to prove anything conclusively, because that would spoil the fun. So at the end of the day, what really matters is not whether RLJ is 90% solid or 99% solid - it's whether any other theory has any kind of realistic chance, whether any other competing theory can be compelling enough to consider. Is there another theory which can adequately explain the various symbols? The blue rose is the obvious one, of course, so we are focusing on that, but all the other RLJ evidence need be accounted for also.

The bottom line is that no convincing alternate to RLJ exists. I say "convincing" because there is no size able support for any alternate theory. Even the anti-RLJ'ers cannot agree on what is the next most likely scenario. There is no other strong case. There is no case that has gained any traction with the thousands and even million of people scrutinizing ASOIAF. All attempts to explain the blue rose =/= RLJ, including very good efforts by folks on this thread, have fallen short. Far short.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but the idea that everything is up in the air until the books are done just isn't going to find many converts. We have quite a bit left to learn, but we also have five books (and other sources) of information at our disposal, and R+L=J is as close to a sure thing as exists. Literally the only thing missing is the explicit statement in the books. No matter how sick of R+L=J some people are, it is not an obvious theory, and of the fraction of readers who know it, an even smaller fraction actually deduced it on their own.

:agree:

Count me in, as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice work KingMonkey... I still need to comment on Eddard in wonderland, that was a terrific essay. Hats off to you

Bael's Bastard I'm in the same boat as you. we all know the books aren't done and that we can't be "sure" about anything, but with that said, there are five books worth of stuff to draw conclusions from, and with a mystery novel, you are NOT supposed to wait for the end to figure out what happened!! That's the whole point, of course, is to read the foreshadowing. The skilled mystery author leaves enough clues to put it together, but not to prove anything conclusively, because that would spoil the fun. So at the end of the day, what really matters is not whether RLJ is 90% solid or 99% solid - it's whether any other theory has any kind of realistic chance, whether any other competing theory can be compelling enough to consider. Is there another theory which can adequately explain the various symbols? The blue rose is the obvious one, of course, so we are focusing on that, but all the other RLJ evidence need be accounted for also.

The bottom line is that no convincing alternate to RLJ exists. I say "convincing" because there is no size able support for any alternate theory. Even the anti-RLJ'ers cannot agree on what is the next most likely scenario. There is no other strong case. There is no case that has gained any traction with the thousands and even million of people scrutinizing ASOIAF. All attempts to explain the blue rose =/= RLJ, including very good efforts by folks on this thread, have fallen short. Far short.

The bottom line is that no convincing alternate to RLJ exists.

Convincing...What does it take to convince?

Have you honestly looked another alternative?

Have you honestly looked at the "support" for RLJ?

I say "convincing" because there is no size able support for any alternate theory.

Support does not make a theory convincing or not... It also does not make it right.

Even the anti-RLJ'ers cannot agree on what is the next most likely scenario.

or facts... or what is in the text... or where the books end and fan fiction begins... or what canon is..

There is no other strong case.

Is the strength of case based solely on popularity?

Cases based on reason and text are stronger than those that are based on fabrication and popular opinion.

.There is no case that has gained any traction with the thousands and even million of people scrutinizing ASOIAF

Read and repeat apparently passes for scrutiny...

Still the support of a theory does not make it valid....

All attempts to explain the blue rose =/= RLJ, including very good efforts by folks on this thread, have fallen short. Far short.

One cannot prove a negative.... explain how the blue rose (actually a flower) does not equal Sam Tarly.... it can't be done.

You can provide a stronger case as an alternative, that does nothing to explain why he is not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I've seen, I would say that A+J=T (a theory which I am not sold on) has much more ground to stand on than any alternative to R+L=J that I have come across.


Share this post


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

×