Jump to content

R+L=J v. 148


Ygrain

Recommended Posts

infer just like rhaegar and lyanna

Is Lyanna repeatedly depicted with a present from Brandon, like we see her with a crownof blue roses?

reflected on it how? every time Ned saw Jon it was a constant reminder, that and the promise that haunted him.

For example, when Ned learns about the twincest, I'd expect a thought along the lines of "if gods abhor these unions, why do they fill people with such lusts?" Or, when he mentions Brandon and Lyanna's wolf blood - that indicates acting rashly, wilfully, but not breaking a huge taboo. There is also no feeling of shame over what Brandon and Lyanna did. It is perfectly possible to love your dead siblings and see their actions for what they were.

BTW, what was Lyanna doing in the tower and why were the KG so adamant on not letting Ned in? Why does Ned remember Arthur Dayne as a shining example of KG when he was merely a jailor for Rhaegar's plaything? Or do you propose that Lyanna had an affair with Brandon and then with Rhaegar?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Listen I want to believe in RLJ too but i'm not gonna shit on a possible theory. In the real world shit happens. Not to mention that gullible people are easy to fool. Not saying i'm not gullible as I want to believe it too. However if the series is always surprising us then isn't it better to see what that surprise might be. If your right good for you, but if your wrong you'll feel really stupid. Where as I will feel half as stupid because my main theory is Brandon, while my secondary theory is Rhaegar.

I'm sorry that I drove you to say that word. I hope you can see that I, and others here too, are trying to tell you that if you want to look for another father to Jon, or a whole new set of parents that are not Rhaegar or Lyanna, that's fine, but Brandon is not the one to be looking at, as he died months before Lyanna even got pregnant.

I was just looking for the SSM where it was said that Brandon didn't have any sons before he died:

It's true that in recent times, the Starks have become quite scarce. There's not many of them in the present generatons. Some may say it's because Ned's siblings died. Brandon died before he had sons, and Lyanna is also dead, and Benjen joined the Night's Watch which means he doesn't have descendants either. It might also have to do with their father, Rickard, who was an only son and I'd have to go back to my notes to see why he was the only child -- and really, I'm speaking from memory, so that may not be quite right. At home I have my notecards, my family trees where I keep this information, because unlike some other people I can't remember everything.

Which probably means legitimate sons, but it's again interesting that Lyanna having (legitimate???) children is skipped over while even young Benjen's non-descendants are talked about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Be happy while your ignorance lasts, I have.

Remembering my siblings fondly =/= giving them statues in the ancestral tomb. Brandon was never Lord of Winterfell and women don't get statues at all.

Also,I never said that Ned shouldn't have taken care of their child. The peculiar thing is that the child's conception broke one of the major taboos and that Ned should have reflected on it somehow.

:lmao:

Gosh, have you never noticed that various B+L, N+L, N+A and the like come every other day and have been argued ad nauseam? Or that the majority of people have a better grasp of book facts and SSMs and the like, and see that a competing theory falls short on facts?

I don't know about you Ygrain,but i like to take into consideration how a person argues a case and what evidence they are able to show .A person maybe right,but they aren't arguing the case to the best that it can and so it is dismissed.

I've seen on the general arguements for Arthur,Ned and Mance for example and if i'm truthful i wouldn't buy it either because it was so poorly argued.They didn't take the time or they didn't utilize the text fully.I have seen other essays ( you haven't because those essays haven't been posted yet) argued by people who argued them effectively to the point where as i said Rhaegar is 4th on my list for being Jon's dad.

Based on the evidence presented in the many links provided in the OP i can't stand behind RLJ because alot of it is "noise" that don't even make sense with the conclusion.Or its the kind of analysis done that isn't analysis .I'm sorry but that's me being honest and not biased or an Anti-RLJer and believe me i've had my go at some of you and i can admit that.

But when i look at what you guys present as clues i have to sought through a lot of "bagasse" to find something that makes sense.

Hence the reason i am looking forward to Kingmonkey's essay in ernest.Maybe i'll feel different after i read it.

But i think you guys are jumping the gun,dismissing other prospects.

ETA: I have a question:

What i would like to know is what criteria in you guys mind would suit a viable theory that you guys think RLJ has done? What are your parameters?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is Lyanna repeatedly depicted with a present from Brandon, like we see her with a crownof blue roses?

For example, when Ned learns about the twincest, I'd expect a thought along the lines of "if gods abhor these unions, why do they fill people with such lusts?" Or, when he mentions Brandon and Lyanna's wolf blood - that indicates acting rashly, wilfully, but not breaking a huge taboo. There is also no feeling of shame over what Brandon and Lyanna did. It is perfectly possible to love your dead siblings and see their actions for what they were.

BTW, what was Lyanna doing in the tower and why were the KG so adamant on not letting Ned in? Why does Ned remember Arthur Dayne as a shining example of KG when he was merely a jailor for Rhaegar's plaything? Or do you propose that Lyanna had an affair with Brandon and then with Rhaegar?

don't know what your geting at, but only if they actually had the affair. At this point theories are just hearsay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry friend what book have you been reading? We all know that incest is a possibility and the fact of the matter is they were close. Now just because I come up with a theory doesn't mean you have to agree with it. However any educated guess would have to correlate with the text which seems to be pointing us in the direction of Rhaegar or Brandon. I think your having trouble with what I said about possibility. It's possible to say that Brandon is the father, it's impossible to say that Stannis is the father.

Where is your text to back up your idea? As far as I can tell you made it up with no support from the text. I am not misunderstanding anything - you didn't provide text to back up your idea.

The misunderstanding it your own - my disagreement isn't because I don't like your theory, it's because your theory is unsupported by the books. The ones I am reading are called A Song of Ice and Fire, so spare me the sarcasm until you can correlate your idea with quotes from said fantasy series.

Yes, incest occurrs amongst the Targrayens, who consider themselves above other men, and Jamie and Cersei, who are reviled for their acts. We have no hints of hints of incest between Brandon and Lyanna however - you just made that up, as far as anyone can tell (feel free to prove otherwise with text quotes).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

don't know what your geting at, but only if they actually had the affair. At this point theories are just hearsay.

What she is getting at is that your "hypothesis" is not only unsupported by text, but it does not make any sense given many of the facts that we know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where is your text to back up your idea? As far as I can tell you made it up with no support from the text. I am not misunderstanding anything - you didn't provide text to back up your idea.

The misunderstanding it your own - my disagreement isn't because I don't like your theory, it's because your theory is unsupported by the books. The ones I am reading are called A Song of Ice and Fire, so spare me the sarcasm until you can correlate your idea with quotes from said fantasy series.

Yes, incest occurrs amongst the Targrayens, who consider themselves above other men, and Jamie and Cersei, who are reviled for their acts. We have no hints of hints of incest between Brandon and Lyanna however - you just made that up, as far as anyone can tell (feel free to prove otherwise with text quotes).

One great family is an irregularity two is a pattern it's not a stretch to say there could be a third.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know about you Ygrain,but i like to take into consideration how a person argues a case and what evidence they are able to show .A person maybe right,but they aren't arguing the case to the best that it can and so it is dismissed.

I've seen on the general arguements for Arthur,Ned and Mance for example and if i'm truthful i wouldn't buy it either because it was so poorly argued.They didn't take the time or they didn't utilize the text fully.I have seen other essays ( you haven't because those essays haven't been posted yet) argued by people who argued them effectively to the point where as i said Rhaegar is 4th on my list for being Jon's dad.

Based on the evidence presented in the many links provided in the OP i can't stand behind RLJ because alot of it is "noise" that don't even make sense with the conclusion.Or its the kind of analysis done that isn't analysis .I'm sorry but that's me being honest and not biased or an Anti-RLJer and believe me i've had my go at some of you and i can admit that.

But when i look at what you guys present as clues i have to sought through a lot of "bagasse" to find something that makes sense.

Hence the reason i am looking forward to Kingmonkey's essay in ernest.Maybe i'll feel different after i read it.

But i think you guys are jumping the gun,dismissing other prospects.

ETA: I have a question:

What i would like to know is what criteria in you guys mind would suit a viable theory that you guys think RLJ has done? What are your parameters?

This question has been answered many times. It should be supported by textual clues, both literal (logistical) and symbolic, as RLJ is. If a theory really wants to rival RLJ, it should probably have an alternate explanation for some of the main RLJ clues, which are listed in the OP. In particular, I would say that it should have an explanation for Blue Roses or it will not convince very many people. As we have seen, everyone's attempts to explain the blue roses without involving Lyanna are tortured and unconvincing. To me, that is the biggest bar to clear.... Just my opinion of course.

I think the real test will simply be - can you make a good case that people find convincing? Hell, 5% of the people on this board believe on nonsense like Mance Rhaegar, so I feel like any moderately convincing theory should be able to win some public support. I don't agree with some who think that everyone one forums are in creative sheep who can't figure anything out - someone actually said this on the last RLJ thread. A good Jon parentage theory WILL convince people if it has merit - that is my prediction.

ETA: that was my point in raising the issue that no alternate has gained any traction in the 15 years since RLJ has existed as a theory. With all the smart people analyzing this series, the fact that no alternate idea has gained any measurable amount of support in all that time suggests that one may not in fact exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know about you Ygrain,but i like to take into consideration how a person argues a case and what evidence they are able to show .A person maybe right,but they aren't arguing the case to the best that it can and so it is dismissed.

I've seen on the general arguements for Arthur,Ned and Mance for example and if i'm truthful i wouldn't buy it either because it was so poorly argued.They didn't take the time or they didn't utilize the text fully.I have seen other essays ( you haven't because those essays haven't been posted yet) argued by people who argued them effectively to the point where as i said Rhaegar is 4th on my list for being Jon's dad.

Based on the evidence presented in the many links provided in the OP i can't stand behind RLJ because alot of it is "noise" that don't even make sense with the conclusion.Or its the kind of analysis done that isn't analysis .I'm sorry but that's me being honest and not biased or an Anti-RLJer and believe me i've had my go at some of you and i can admit that.

But when i look at what you guys present as clues i have to sought through a lot of "bagasse" to find something that makes sense.

Hence the reason i am looking forward to Kingmonkey's essay in ernest.Maybe i'll feel different after i read it.

But i think you guys are jumping the gun,dismissing other prospects.

ETA: I have a question:

What i would like to know is what criteria in you guys mind would suit a viable theory that you guys think RLJ has done? What are your parameters?

You're right that most of the proposals for different parentage come from people who do not know their ASOIAF very well and are mostly based on a hunch or preference or whatever. On the other hand, there was once a very well thought out essay on Mance being the father, very well argued, avoiding the usual pitfalls and inconsistencies. The problem was that while it fit the facts (as they were known then; the poster presumed that Lyanna disappeared from Winterfell and now we know that it was near Harrenhal), there was nothing in the text to base it on. This is what I am also arguing with Crimsonsmile below: the lack of textual support. Even if we dismiss the timeline issue as unreliable, there is no imagery, no symbolism, tying Lyanna to any other partner but Rhaegar. - BTW, how are the essays going? You promised to link us.

Considering the "bagasse": you must realize that the majority of stuff which gets posted these days are merely discoveries of wordplay or speech patterns to which R+L adds an extra sense, not clues as such. We need a new book to chew on :-)

As for the parametres: a successful theory needs to fit all the criteria that R+L does, equally successfully or better. I.e., there shouldn't be timeline issues, it should go with the characteristics of the people involved, explain certain mysteries and characters' behaviour, fit with symbolism etc. If we take e.g. Brandon+Lyanna:

- timeline: doesn't fit

- Ned's silence: a good explanation (shame) but inconsistent with the thoughts of secrets too dangerous to share

- blue roses: no connection

- textual support: no hints of anything improper going on between those two, even though there are situations (Targaryen incest, twincest) which are a direct parallel

See? Out of four points, and I could come up with way more, three don't fit already, and fatally. I see no reason to continue dissecting the theory because it clearly doesn't fit.

don't know what your geting at, but only if they actually had the affair. At this point theories are just hearsay.

I'm getting at the way GRRM writes - foreshadowing, imagery etc. There is a whole lot of hints towards R+L but none towards B+L (no matter which brother you pick as B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One great family is an irregularity two is a pattern it's not a stretch to say there could be a third.

Do you have evidence? Anything?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One great family is an irregularity two is a pattern it's not a stretch to say there could be a third.

Could. But is there a hint that it was so? No. For example, Cersei wonders if Loras and Marge might be as close as she and Jaime, but in no character's PoV do we see any situation from which we might gather that there is indeed something going on between those two; instead, we get more or less veiled hints at Loras' homosexuality and his relationship with Renly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

infer just like rhaegar and lyanna

Reading back over pages two and three, I can see that I am wasting my time responding to you, since you are completely immune to evidence from the text which not only contradicts but actually disproves your theory, and since you feel no compunction to back up anything you assert with quotes from the text which support your theory in any way, literal or symbolic.

You are crossing the line into trolling, in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, no, you don't have quotes from the text to support your hypothesis which goes against the timeline.

your saying it goes against the timeline but you don't have a timeline. The only timeline we are given is a vague one. If you hear that Lyanna was captured at the start of the new year which is 282AC, and also that Brandon died during the exact same span of time. Then you have an argument, otherwise you are correct and incorrect at the same time. Though i'd love to hear where you're getting your timeline as well as your theory on who's the parents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The evidence for RLJ is in the OP. The evidence for your hypothesis is nonexistent. You haven't even tried to offer any. That's how this works, here - you make an assertion, you back it with evidence to support it... Or else you are writing (I dread the term) fan fiction. You aren't interpreting the text - you are literally just imagining things that could have happened and then asserting that they did, with no evidence from the books to support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now seriously, you've chewed up four pages of RLJ here with your unsupported theory. Please, come back with evidence of some kind or write your own theory about this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now seriously, you've chewed up four pages of RLJ here with your unsupported theory. Please, come back with evidence of some kind or write your own theory about this.

Listen i'm not trying to belittle you but do you have a timeline with irrefutable dates to say i'm wrong?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Listen i'm not trying to belittle you but do you have a timeline with irrefutable dates to say i'm wrong?

You don't need dates. You do need to know that Lyanna was missing for at least a year, and Brandon was imprisoned and murdered right after she went missing. You also need to know that Dany was born 9 months after the Sack and Jon 8-9 months before her, which makes his birthdate around the Sack or even after, a year or more after Lyanna went missing. Case closed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...