Jump to content

Archived

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

HelenaExMachina

R+L=J v.151

Recommended Posts

Nothing prompted Ned thinking about Rhaegar?????He just came into Ned's mind out the blue?


No no, the question was what sarcastic of Littlefinger's prompted it. I don't think any sarcastic comment of Littlefinger's prompted it, that doesn't mean I think that nothing at all prompted it! I'd suggest that what prompted it is that he just met a royal bastard, made a vow to the bastard's mother that it would want for nothing, and when he made that promise, she smiled a smile that "cut the heart out of him". There's another time that Ned made a promise and the result was a smile, and that one had a huge impact on him that explains why such a smile would "cut the heart out of him."

How about somebody (Rhaegar) making a bigger deal (production)  about something that shouldn't be a big deal.....


Ok, but what? I'm sorry, I'm just not understanding what you're getting at. I understand the idea that Rhaegar came to mind because something about him reminded Ned of something being revealed that was widely known but shouldn't have been mentioned, but what are the somethings?

I don't really get the link here, because the whole point of what Littlefinger was saying was that nobody would have really cared if Arryn had revealed that Robert had bastards, but never mind that right now. What I don't understand is where Rhaegar comes into this scenario. What is it that he revealed that he shouldn't have revealed? Or didn't reveal, but might have if he'd gone to brothels?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think it was pertinent to the aftermath that this version of events be the case.It made what was clearly a rebellion more palatable.Look at the era in which these people are living in.

 

What makes a better song and story.

 

Anti-Targ version.

 

Rhaegar kidnapped and raped Lyanna.Robert started a rebellion to get her back.

 

Pro Targ version

 

Rhaegar died for the woman he loved after running off with her.

 

The truth

 

Niether of these things happened ,but the truth really wouldn't make a good song for the singers.

 

I think this is a generally unfair statement. I don't know about the fandom.I know what the texts says,implies and infers......Selmy had no inside/intimate knowledge because there is none to tell. Martin is dealing with among other things 'perception' and the conclusions people draw based on what they think they see and know and he's doing that also with his fans.Or should i say most of the fandom has fallen into the same trap as the characters in the story.

 

And what is happening in a lot of cases is people seeing what they want to see which makes them blind to the evidence.No matter how unpleasent,or how much one may not want a case to be the evidence is the evidence and one should not superimpose ones will on it.

 

The truth is the truth is the truth and no one in this tale who knew Rhaegar can give a quote,statement anything from Rhaegar regarding Lyanna.They all,everyone of them made their conclusions regarding Rhaegar's feeling based on (2) things .Him crowning Lyanna QOLAB and the belief that he ran off with her.

 

So its not a matter atleast not for me about dismissing Selmy's statement.I don't ,i see it for what it is.It's is a plot point that also represents how people think and arrive at conclusions in this world-Limited info cloaked in romanticism.The song of life is not pretty and its not ugly it's both.

 

Sometimes the heroe's father isn't a dashing Prince who everyone fell over,but a womanizing drunk with a temper.

 

ETA: Where did Martin confirm it was Lyanna?Do you have a link for that?

 

The sad thing though is Ned actually didn't give an endorsement of Rhaegar he actually insulted him.This quote is yet another one that the fandom took out of context.This is a bit from my essay.It actually has nothing to do with proving who Jon's father is but i just wanted to bring up something concerning Ned's thinking on Rhaegar.

 

“Ned was soaked through to the bone, and his soul had grown cold. “It had to be more than that, or why kill him (Jon Arryn)?"<Snip>. (LF):"Now I see. Lord Arryn learned that His Grace had filled the bellies of some whores and fishwives, and for that he had to be silenced. Small wonder. Allow a man like that to live, and next he's like to blurt out that the sun rises in the east. “There was no answer Ned Stark could give to that but a frown. For the first time in years, he found himself remembering Rhaegar Targaryen. He wondered if Rhaegar had frequented brothels; somehow he thought not.(AGOT,Ned Chpt 35)”

 

 

What is this actually saying? 

 

Allow a man like that to live! What kind of man? A man who would blab about something he found out. That is what prompted Ned’s thought of Rhaegar because he (Rhaegar) did the same blasted thing. He spilled the beans about something.

 

 

"She had smiled then, a smile so tremulous and sweet that it cut the heart out of him. Riding through the rainy night, Ned saw Jon Snow's face in front of him, so like a younger version of his own. If the gods frowned so on bastards, he thought dully, why did they fill men with such lusts? "Lord Baelish, what do you know of Robert's bastards?"

 

 

Edit: To add final thoughts and fix typos.

 

I can agree that one needs to take Neds thoughts, what he is thinking vs. what it means with caution, and I also get that Martin is talking about ureliable narrators and the "song" vs. the truth, but you cannot say definitively that there is no truth because its about the song.

The common denomonator in any "song" is truth.

 

Martin is also writing about the dangers of religious fanatacism, living prophesy instead of living life, and letting such things  as prophesy take care of themselves.

 

Martin also says his guiding principle in writing is the heart, and the conflicted decisions people make, choosing what is right when its in conflict with what one wants, and I suspect that BOTH Rhaegar and Lyanna fall into that category. I think their relationship, or their feelings for one another, at least initially. was messy and QUITE painful, and nothing a singer would sing about, and think both of them are likely going to disappoint a lot of people who put duty over love because love is the death of duty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would trust the app/ The World of Ice and Fire over anything a forum member would say.

 

Have to agree.

 

Anyway on to "Poldark" and "True Detective......"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 
Okay, can you explain how he came by that information, because I don't think he made it up, and Martin has not corrected it.


There's no evidence that he did come by the information from George though. And there's no evidence that George even knows the app says that.

Also, it should be remembered that Martin actually didn't have to confirm, or even answer. He could have said,"keep reading."


Again there's no evidence saying that George confirmed or answered anything about this piece of information. Nothing from the app is verifiably from George.

It's not about not liking if the information goes against a particular theory. It's not liking that nothing from it can be shown to have been what George said or that George even said it. Any poster who's honest with themselves shouldn't trust the app or anything contained in it no matter which theories they hold to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no evidence that he did come by the information from George though. And there's no evidence that George even knows the app says that.


Again there's no evidence saying that George confirmed or answered anything about this piece of information. Nothing from the app is verifiably from George.

It's not about not liking if the information goes against a particular theory. It's not liking that nothing from it can be shown to have been what George said or that George even said it. Any poster who's honest with themselves shouldn't trust the app or anything contained in it no matter which theories they hold to.

Suit yourself, but I'm not sure what the point is of putting out there for it to untrue or a dastardly trick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Selmys credibility is critical to what we can gather in terms of clues to the nature of Lyanna and Rhaegar as Jons parents

 

Selmy has been pretty straight-forward with Dany about her family as much as he can, be clearly, the text is such you can see he is still holding back a lot of information.

 

I speculate that Rhaegar trusted Selmy a great deal- to a point.  I think he understood that Selmy would never be part of whatever he was doing becaus of his rigidity regarding his role as KG. You see him giving somewhat of a veiled criticism of the "secrets of the Red Keep," and the secrets of Rhaegar. And while he still respected Rhaegar, he was also, at least privately, somewhat critical of him regarding his choices and Daynes part in them.

 

I don't think he actually knows about Jon, and probably just put the TOJ  out of his mind, perhaps not wanting to know or look any deeper, but conversely, not knowing about Jon specifically doesn't negate him from knowing the rest.

I agree that Selmy is credible and that he applies his judgment as soundly as he can. And that he gives Dany info carefully-- makes sense from both a strategic and humanitarian point.

 

But the idea that Rhaegar confided in him or that he has specific knowledge--yes, Selmy talks about secrets in the Red Keep. But that's hardly specific in the stronghold of a royal family. Selmy himself says Rhaegar never confided in him as R did in Arthur, wonders if anyone truly knew Rhaegar, and seems to have had limited chances to have heard anything about the R and L disappearance first hand, either before or after. If he did know anything, he's not yet telling.

 

He is letting us know about his own tortured longing for Ashara, about his knowledge of the ways love has messed up the kingdom in the past, that he thinks highly of Rhaegar. Given all of that, seems like his conclusions re: R+L can just be his putting things together based on common sense.

 

 But in term of his textual function, I think its pretty clear he is one of the last live voices of past events who knew all the characters. You also see his own memories more or less in line with what others remember, i.e., Elias delicate health, Rhaegars "fondness" for her and Danys own reaction to that word when she asked Selmy whether her brother married for love.

She knew EXACTLY what he meant- Rhaegar did not marry for love and as nice as he might have been, it seems pretty clear to everyone.

His experiences fall in line with Kevan and Cersei Lannister, JonCon, and even Viserys. And when you look back Jorahs tourney story aligns with what Selmy remembers They all just express it differently but in the same context, and the way Martin brings all the seperate pieces together is very clever.

 

Selmys ruminations on the past loves of the Targaryens and lumping Rhaegar and Lyanna into that group is another peace of the clue, and we see that what Rhaegar did was motivated by love, as well as other factors and falls completely in line with Martins own stated reasons for why he writes: "conflicts of the heart."

 

" I've alI have always agreed with William Faulkner. He said the human heart in conflict with itself is the only thing worth writing about. I have always taken that as my guiding principle, and the rest is just set dressing. I mean, you can have a dragon, you can have a science fiction story set on a distant planet with aliens and starships, you can have a western about a gunslinger, or a mystery novel about a private eye, or even literary fiction- and ultimately you're still writing about the human heart in conflict with itself. So that's the the way I try to approach this this thing.  And while I've worked within a genre, I've never liked to be bound by them. " George R. Martin, The Atlantic interiviewed by Rachael Brown, July 2011.

 

And the fact that Selmys first true love is himself and his honor postitions him to be the last person to have a dog in this fight other than to stand back, cluck his tongue and talk about how Rhaegar should have followed the rules.

I agree that his narrative function is that he was close to the Targaryen reign and even Rhaegar in ways Dany can never be. He seems to tell the truth as he sees it. And his memories add a lot. Especially about the marriage to Elia.

 

But that still gives him no specific knowledge of R+ L's disappearance. The narrative structure is clever. Many see the tourney and the crown--as does Ned. Ned at least gives us some hint of a baby. It is "common knowledge" that they disappeared. But It's also "common knowledge" that Jon is Ned's kid. Only Ned's thoughts really give us anything different. Selmy hasn't given any direct knowledge in his narration re: R+L's love that I can think of, let alone why they "disappeared."

 

I agree that Martin focuses a lot on the heart. And Selmy's observations are sound re: the history of the past Targaryens. But that doesn't mean he's right about Rhaegar. Just means he assumes that's what happened and is helping Dany make sense of it. Which is a matter of the heart--Dany's heart. And his own. Maybe he knows more. If so, he's not telling.

 

And re: Poldark-- :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know you could actually critique the theory where it is actually being discussed instead of making snarky comments about it on here.

 

For starters, those essays have been discussed around here for a while now. Advertised even. Secondly, what's the problem with Westeros.org members discussing something RLJ related here, that they read somewhere else? I don't know about others, but these are the only forums I post on. So when I read something about RLJ, I'm going to discuss it here, if anywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lady Darry,

 

if Lyanna had the full picture of what had transpired in KL (either because she had spies who knew everything that transpired to court and told her in time - very unlikely - or because Ned told her after he arrived) then it is possible that she was afraid that Tywin might to something to her child. But then, it is not very likely that Ned told her any gruesome details about Elia and her children, nor would it be very surprising if Lyanna - not knowing anything about what had transpired in KL - would be afraid for the welfare of her trueborn son by Rhaegar if the Targaryen dynasty was deposed by Robert. Especially in light of the fact that she was about to die alone at the end of the world were she was not exactly surrounded by friends of the family.

 

But if she had only given birth to Rhaegar's bastard she would have had little reason to be afraid for his life. Neither Renly nor Stannis target Edric Storm after Robert's death because of his 'better claim', after all. And we even see that a child rumored to be the bastard of Aegon II which was proclaimed king after Rhaenyra had fled the city during the Dance, Gaemon Palehair, was pardoned after the war and brought up as a ward of the Crown, and became close friends with Aegon III.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As to the marriage:

 

My guess is simply that Rhaegar took Lyanna and then married her publicly at a castle where controlled by his friends/Targaryen loyalists (Harrenhal or Maidenpool spring to mind). Afterwards, it was Aerys' reaction to this - perhaps he was calling for Rhaegar and Lyanna's heads - that forced Rhaegar and Lyanna underground. That way we get the much-needed explanation as to why the hell Rhaegar and Lyanna didn't do anything to stop the war or try to make peace after the Starks were arrested and executed. My guess is that Aerys - stuck in his Harrenhal mindset - continued to believe that Brandon and Rickard were conspiring with Rhaegar against him, and thus had to die in Rhaegar's place. Only later on, when Aerys realized that Robert, Jon Arryn, and Ned were a serious threat to the Targaryen rule he changed his mind, and perhaps understood that Rhaegar was never actually plotting against him.

 

If George wants to keep the marriage a secret - which he obviously does - then he cannot possibly give us the reason why Rhaegar and Lyanna 'run away' since that is an integral part to the marriage story. Telling us that Rhaegar had to hide/flee from his father may be too big a clue at this point in the story. It is very odd that TWoIaF did give us lot of new information on events leading up the abduction but effectively nothing on the event itself, nor on the events that followed immediately thereafter and eventually resulted in the deaths of Brandon and Rickard. There is a lot of stuff yet missing there, and the missing pieces there should be very important.

 

And depending on the depth of Aerys' madness and paranoia a child by Lyanna would have been the last thing that would have brought Rhaegar back into his father's good graces. Neither would it have been his behavior - causing a major crisis and then ignoring the fallout for months.

 

Brandon came to KL shouting for Rhaegar's head. Why would Aerys think this is a sign of conspiracy against him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Brandon came to KL shouting for Rhaegar's head. Why would Aerys think this is a sign of conspiracy against him?

 

Aerys was paranoid. He thought everything was a conspiracy against him. Also, Brandon is asking for the crown prince's head. That's treason against the crown and family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TheSmallOther,

 

we know that Brandon seems to have challenged Rhaegar to single combat, but we don't yet know why he did that - simply because Rhaegar abducted Lyanna or because Rhaegar had pulled a Duncan the Small and had already married Lyanna?

 

Prior to TWoIaF we could reasonably assume that Aerys might have come to the defense of his son and heir, and imprisoned Brandon and his companions because he had threatened the Crown Prince (although even then we knew that Aerys wasn't exactly trusting Rhaegar) but now the idea that a post-Harrenhal Aerys should actually give a fig about what happens to Rhaegar makes no sense at all. Aerys should have cheered every man on he considered to be a real enemy of Rhaegar's - except it is quite unlikely that he believed the Starks were Rhaegar's enemies. The outcome of Harrenhal establishes that Aerys' inner circle completely agrees that the crowning of Lyanna was a ploy by Rhaegar to win the allegiance of the Starks.

 

If Brandon (and later Rickard) claimed that this wasn't the case he wouldn't have a good chance to convince the king. Especially if Rhaegar had indeed already married Lyanna.

 

Assuming that Aerys had truly come to Rhaegar's defense there - and this was widely known - that Rhaegar's decision to not join his father at KL with Lyanna at his side doesn't make any sense at all. After all, if Aerys was defending Rhaegar there, he wouldn't have to fear all that much from Aerys, right? And Rhaegar and Lyanna coming to court could have helped sort the whole thing out, perhaps resulting in a non-death sentence for Brandon and Rickard.

 

The fact is, we don't really know what Brandon and then later Rickard were accused of, and why they and Brandon's companions as well as the fathers/kin of some of the companions were executed for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aerys had a prophetic dream that a direwolf would overthrow him and to prevent it, he killed Rickard and Brandon. But the action of preventing that prophetic vision coming true resulted in the fulfillment of that dream. This might also explain why Aerys felt threatened by the KotLT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the record... Brandon was an IDIOT for showing up like that.

Wolfsblood be damned. He road all the way there from Riverrun and still shouted for the crown princes head. Moronic, inexcusable. He may have died anyway, but he helped nothing by doing this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the record... Brandon was an IDIOT for showing up like that.

Wolfsblood be damned. He road all the way there from Riverrun and still shouted for the crown princes head. Moronic, inexcusable. He may have died anyway, but he helped nothing by doing this.

 

He might have actually panicked.

 

Look, I don't necessarily think he is a great guy,  but his seduction of women, is hardly any different from any other entitled lord, and personally I think the Red Vipers slapping Barras mother across the face is worse, but his character doesn't seem to suffer for it.,

 

But if Brandon believed that Rhaegar had abducted his sister, and that certainly seems to be an honest perception, he had every right to challenge him to combat becauase Rhaegar did not have the right to take a high lords maiden daughter, again, going on perception. I would also ask the question, why did Brandon go to KL? Was his assumption that Rhaegar was there and why?

 

And would it not have been expected that Brandon might have gone there? 

 

Hoster called him a gallant fool. He was a fool because he rode into a trap, or a situation he couldn't possibly win because Aerys was not going to give him justice, not because he might have wanted to see justice for Lyanna, and yes, even House Stark.

 

It said that Aerys chose fire for his champion, so can we assume that Aerys challenged Rickard, or that Rickard challenged Aerys to single combat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't really know yet how Brandon learned about Lyanna's disappearance/abduction, and what his proof for Rhaegar's role in that was, nor why he chose to go to KL/believed that Rhaegar was there.

 

And that's the mystery there. Why would George keep the events leading to the outbreak of the Rebellion obscured that much if there wasn't crucial information to be revealed there? Why don't we know why Rhaegar and Lyanna went underground/had to hide? If it is just 'they wanted to hide to get out of Rickard/Brandon/Robert/Aerys' way' then George could already have told us that much. That wouldn't necessarily give away that they might have had a child more than the whole revelation that Rhaegar had abducted Lyanna.

 

As to Brandon:

 

I'm not sure that he, strictly speaking, had a right to challenge the Prince of Dragonstone to single combat or even accuse him of a crime. Lord Rickard could, as Lord of Winterfell and head of House Stark, but Brandon was only his heir, which essentially means he was a legal nobody until his father died. Brandon did not speak for House Stark of Winterfell while he was merely his father's heir.

 

While Lord Lyonel Baratheon set a strong precedent for rebelling against his liege when suffering a similar insult, it was the Lord of Strom's End doing that, not his heir. More importantly, Lord Lyonel apparently had no legal means to act against Aegon V or Prince Duncan in that matter besides outright rebellion and secession - the later trial-by-combat apparently was a way to settle the thing peacefully rather than continuing the war. In that sense Brandon's assumption that Aerys II or Rhaegar would actually meet his challenge rather than dealing with him the usual way - i.e. executing him or cutting out his tongue or taking his hands as was custom if anyone threatened or attacked a member of the royal family.

 

Whether the Targaryens could actually not abduct young maidens with impunity is a more or less open questions. Many princes did just that, especially Aegon the Unworthy, so there is are precedents. Any sane prince should have realized that the Starks would not look kindly on that kind of thing, but if Aerys had backed Rhaegar on this I don't think Rickard could have done much about it - if he was not willing to go to war over this incident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure that he, strictly speaking, had a right to challenge the Prince of Dragonstone to single combat or even accuse him of a crime.

 

There is no reason to...

 

Kidding :D

 

Baelor Breakspear, the Prince of Dragonstone and the Hand of the King, was considered as a normal, single knight in the trial by seven. Trials are religious. Against the gods, all men and women are equal.

 

Naerys was the Queen yet she was accused for treason and Aemon defended her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It said that Aerys chose fire for his champion, so can we assume that Aerys challenged Rickard, or that Rickard challenged Aerys to single combat?

 

I think the assumption was the Rickard would have faced off against one of the KG.

 

I could be wrong.. happens once every 2-3 years.


 

Share this post


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

×