A+J=T v.8

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

3 minutes ago, King Viserys Targaryen IV said:

what was the description for Naerys?

Childbirth also proved a trial to Naerys, for she was small and delicate. When Prince Daeron was born on the last day of 153 AC, Grand Maester Alford warned that another pregnancy might kill her.

[purple-eyes]

3 minutes ago, King Viserys Targaryen IV said:

what was the description for Naerys?

Grand maester warned her that another pregnancy could kill her. 

She had several pregnancies later and also delivered a healthy child who is daenerys, after about thirty years, she died in childbirth. 

[Lord Varys]

On 23.1.2016 at 2:57 AM, A spoon of knife and fork said:

All that's needed to qualify as a psychopath is a difficulty (or impossibility - it's not clear) in experiencing empathy.  see here:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empathy#Psychopathy

Many people who meet the criteria have relationships, some many year lasting relationships.  There's even some legitimate science suggesting that so-called "high functioning" or "pro social" psychopaths are more likely to be successful or hold positions of high authority than other people.  Probably because they didn't have that pesky empathy getting in the way when they had to do something ruthless to get ahead.  Take Tywin, for example.

Since we have a lot of evidence that Aerys is a cruel asshole, and that he has sexually sadistic tendencies, but no evidence that he has hallucinations of any kind, I think the case for him being a psychopath is much stronger than that he's a schizophrenic.  Now it might be he doens't qualify as a psychopath, but just has some other kind of a "personality disorder". 

I see a lot of similarities with Joffery, Aerys, and Viserys.  Viserys not feeling any emapthy whatsoever for Daenerys or apparently any other person is I think very strong evidence that he is a psychopath.  I am not sure what else you need.  Joffery it's unclear - but there certainly is some ocnnection between psychopathy and doing things like murdering animals.  I think it's probable he was headed that way.  With a good environment maybe he could have become pro social and a decent ruler.  

 

Just to finish that. I'm aware of those high functioning psychopaths who tend to gravitate to position of authority in government, economics, clergy, etc., but I'm really not sure whether Aerys fits that bill. It could, of course, be that he also lacked empathy in this sense, but why the hell did he then make amends and humbled himself in front of the High Septon after that mad lapse involving his former mistress and her family? That seems to me as if he felt genuine remorse of the whole thing. If we had information that there was a public outcry and uprisings in the wake of the whole thing one could entertain the idea that he feigned his remorse and made a public show to pacify the people, but there are no such hints.

And, again, his later symptoms (Harrenhal, lack of hygiene, paranoia, general irrational notions and ideas) don't suggest psychopathic behavior. But I'm also not really trying to argue it must have been some type of schizophrenia-like illness. That was just an example what it could have been. I'm more inclined to believe that he suffered from a specific dragonlord hereditary mental disorder any Targaryen carries - an illness that affects dragonless Targaryens more often than dragonriding Targaryens.

Viserys certainly had issues with Dany, but so did she with him. I don't think we can say he had no feelings or empathy for her, just not enough (and certainly when he was drunk and got himself killed). However, Dany is just one person - the little tidbits we get about Viserys behaving towards other people (the sellswords he drinks with), for one - and thus hardly enough evidence to diagnose him. More importantly, his overall characterization suggests that he can empathize with other people and feels a lot of emotions, most notably fear. He wants to loved, fears his people isn't actually praying for his return, and is very afraid of Robert and Drogo/the Dothraki (when he is sober).

 

[King Viserys Targaryen IV]

18 minutes ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

Childbirth also proved a trial to Naerys, for she was small and delicate. When Prince Daeron was born on the last day of 153 AC, Grand Maester Alford warned that another pregnancy might kill her.

 

16 minutes ago, purple-eyes said:

Grand maester warned her that another pregnancy could kill her. 

She had several pregnancies later and also delivered a healthy child who is daenerys, after about thirty years, she died in childbirth. 

Couldn't that be marked up to the Maesters are using medieval science and there is no guarantee that Elia would have died... And that Rhaegar took it seriously while Aegon didn't really care?

[purple-eyes]

1 minute ago, King Viserys Targaryen IV said:

 

Couldn't that be marked up to the Maesters are using medieval science and there is no guarantee that Elia would have died... And that Rhaegar took it seriously while Aerys didn't really care?

I guess you mean aegon IV. 

I guess Aegon just wanted to claim his husband right and did not care if his sister wife die or not. Or a darker version, he may want to kill his sister to revenge her and aemon since he hated them a lot. 

My point is that maesters gave a much more serious diagnosis to Elia than to Nareys. 

They declared she would not bear any more children. Thus left rhaegar no choice except finding another woman. 

If maesters told Elia, another pregnancy might kill you, then elia and rhaegar may want to wait for some time to let elia completely recover and try again and be successful. Like what happened to naerys later.

Then this will weaken the necessity of eloping of rhaegar. 

 

 

 

 

[Lord Varys]

56 minutes ago, RumHam said:

This made me think, what if in addition to their mothers dying in childbirth the three heads of the dragon were also all products of rape? I'm sure someone must have had that thought before. Of course it requires Rhaegar to be an actual rapist which most of us don't believe. But I suppose it could be possible that Rhaegar did force himself on Lyanna at first. Maybe he felt there was some urgency to the prophecy and he needed his third head as soon as possible. Then over time when he explained his reasons I guess Lyanna could have come to love him. I mean it seems really unlikely to me, but it is possible. 

Or she was just a prisoner who still wanted her baby looked after despite her hatred for it's father. Either way it would be strange to have two of the three heads be products of rape and not the third. Which actually makes me think Aerys probably didn't rape Joanna. It may have been a fucked up situation, but I doubt it was rape by the Westerosi definition. 

I suggested as much a while ago, I think in the Jon thread. But I'm not really claiming that this was my original idea.

The 'rape concept' certainly can be strained enough in this context to make whatever may have happened between Rhaegar and Lyanna not the same that happened between Aerys and Rhaella.

I think a convincing scenario for Rhaegar and Lyanna would be that they actually had a fledging romance going on at Harrenhal, which was subsequently ended by Lyanna at the end of the tourney (which Rhaegar then tried to rekindle/restart - and failed - with his coronation thing). Lyanna eventually chose duty over love, and there was (possibly) not yet any intercourse at Harrenhal. Now, Lyanna is truly in love with Rhaegar and all, but she decides to marry Robert anyway, and never see Rhaegar again. Rhaegar grudgingly accepts that (because Aegon isn't born yet, Elia is still fertile, and he has yet no mad notion that Lyanna could be connected to the prophecy at all).

That changes after Aegon's birth, though. Now, depending when exactly Rhaegar and Lyanna first had sex (after the abduction) it is not unlikely at all that Rhaegar took Lyanna by force/forced himself on her/deflowered her against her will in the sense we would call rape. Assume that Lyanna was actually abducted, and had actually no interest in running away or continue a relationship with Rhaegar, she would have been very mad and angry at him, and in no mood to actually fuck him after he had taken her. Think of her as dialed-up version of an adolescent Arya. That girl who put the squires back into place during at Harrenhal and who later actually rode in the tourney disguised as a man. She wouldn't have backed down.

Rhaegar's first time with Lyanna could easy have been a much more violent episode than the Jaime-Cersei welcome sex in ASoS. Cersei eventually makes it clear to the reader and Jaime that she is enjoying the sex and also urges Jaime to continue (if not in words then in deeds). However, if Arya's behavior towards Gendry is any indication - she is very determined to not let him see what she actually feels - it is not unlikely that Lyanna, while perhaps secretly enjoying that she was with Rhaegar again, actually viciously fought back/attacked Rhaegar when they first had sex after the abduction.

And this could then certainly qualify as rape. In fact, depending when and how that happened it is also possible that the reports Robert based his 'rape beliefs' on go back to some eye witnesses from the abduction (say, Rhaegar took Lyanna then and there and one of her guardsmen actually saw the whole thing and could later tell Brandon and Robert about it).

I must say I like the darker aspects of this whole thing. That people have to die and hurt to bring forth the savior(s). Perhaps the whole Rebellion and Aerys' madness and cruelty was 'magically necessary' as a huge blood sacrifice to bring forth Daenerys? Rhaella clearly suffered the most, as did many of Aerys' victims during the cause of the war and before that. In Tyrion's case Tywin would be the one who killed many people, and Jon's conception sort of set the stage for the entire Rebellion.

And the whole scenario of Dany only being born in the wake of her father's madness, to a man who clearly was a complete nutcase certainly isn't a coincidence, either. Perhaps the world has to be destroyed first to bring forth the savior? This would essentially just be variation of the 'people have to die work really great magic' theme. And the conception of the savior(s) possibly is greater magic than the actual magic they later do...

[purple-eyes]

So come back to AJT, I do not think Tyrion is son of Aerys, at least at this point.

He needed to carry his burden and ghost to live on, and this is the fact that he killed his father, for whatever reason.

Just like Maekar, and Aeron, and many others.

It would be a lame writing to simply declare that he is son of Aerys, in order to grant him a relief out of this burden and also access to dragon and maybe even a positon of husband of Dany and maybe even a chance to be on IT.

 

 

[purple-eyes]

4 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

I suggested as much a while ago, I think in the Jon thread. But I'm not really claiming that this was my original idea.

The 'rape concept' certainly can be strained enough in this context to make whatever may have happened between Rhaegar and Lyanna not the same that happened between Aerys and Rhaella.

I think a convincing scenario for Rhaegar and Lyanna would be that they actually had a fledging romance going on at Harrenhal, which was subsequently ended by Lyanna at the end of the tourney (which Rhaegar then tried to rekindle/restart - and failed - with his coronation thing). Lyanna eventually chose duty over love, and there was (possibly) not yet any intercourse at Harrenhal. Now, Lyanna is truly in love with Rhaegar and all, but she decides to marry Robert anyway, and never see Rhaegar again. Rhaegar grudgingly accepts that (because Aegon isn't born yet, Elia is still fertile, and he has yet no mad notion that Lyanna could be connected to the prophecy at all).

That changes after Aegon's birth, though. Now, depending when exactly Rhaegar and Lyanna first had sex (after the abduction) it is not unlikely at all that Rhaegar took Lyanna by force/forced himself on her/deflowered her against her will in the sense we would call rape. Assume that Lyanna was actually abducted, and had actually no interest in running away or continue a relationship with Rhaegar, she would have been very mad and angry at him, and in no mood to actually fuck him after he had taken her. Think of her as dialed-up version of an adolescent Arya. That girl who put the squires back into place during at Harrenhal and who later actually rode in the tourney disguised as a man. She wouldn't have backed down.

Rhaegar's first time with Lyanna could easy have been a much more violent episode than the Jaime-Cersei welcome sex in ASoS. Cersei eventually makes it clear to the reader and Jaime that she is enjoying the sex and also urges Jaime to continue (if not in words then in deeds). However, if Arya's behavior towards Gendry is any indication - she is very determined to not let him see what she actually feels - it is not unlikely that Lyanna, while perhaps secretly enjoying that she was with Rhaegar again, actually viciously fought back/attacked Rhaegar when they first had sex after the abduction.

And this could then certainly qualify as rape. In fact, depending when and how that happened it is also possible that the reports Robert based his 'rape beliefs' on go back to some eye witnesses from the abduction (say, Rhaegar took Lyanna then and there and one of her guardsmen actually saw the whole thing and could later tell Brandon and Robert about it).

I must say I like the darker aspects of this whole thing. That people have to die and hurt to bring forth the savior(s). Perhaps the whole Rebellion and Aerys' madness and cruelty was 'magically necessary' as a huge blood sacrifice to bring forth Daenerys? Rhaella clearly suffered the most, as did many of Aerys' victims during the cause of the war and before that. In Tyrion's case Tywin would be the one who killed many people, and Jon's conception sort of set the stage for the entire Rebellion.

And the whole scenario of Dany only being born in the wake of her father's madness, to a man who clearly was a complete nutcase certainly isn't a coincidence, either. Perhaps the world has to be destroyed first to bring forth the savior? This would essentially just be variation of the 'people have to die work really great magic' theme. And the conception of the savior(s) possibly is greater magic than the actual magic they later do...

It is interesting. I have not thought about this.

So they met and fell in love, started a relationship (possibly had sex), then Lyanna somehow decided to end this relationship, then Rhaegar tried to make up by crowning, but Lyanna was not interested. And this happened between rhaegar was sent to look for Lyanna, and he gave that crown of roses in public. From the morning of day 3 to the end of day 5. So less than three days.  

It sounds like a man and a woman met in a pub, then had one night stand, then man wanted to see her more, then woman refused and said I had boyfriend, I am done with this. then man tried to give her some good gifts. Then the woman refused again and left.

I mean it is certainly possible, I have to say. In fact we do not know the attitude of Lyanna on sex life. Maybe she is like Mormont daughter and very open to this.

She can certainly do this either for personal pleasure, or as a revenge to Robert (She can also had some affair before marriage, then they are even).  

But no matter what, I do not see rhaegar raped Lyanna. He may abduct her without notice or againse her will, but it sounds like Lyanna was indeed attracted by rhaegar a lot and she would be willing to have sex with him even she was taken from her home by force.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[UnmaskedLurker]

23 minutes ago, purple-eyes said:

Grand maester warned her that another pregnancy could kill her. 

She had several pregnancies later and also delivered a healthy child who is daenerys, after about thirty years, she died in childbirth. 

I think the difference could be in the different narrators. The information about Naerys comes from a document being written by a maester. The information about Elia is coming from the thoughts of JonCon. So it would be understandable that the maester would focus on the technical diagnosis. While JonCon would focus on Elia's inability to give Rhaegar any more children.

The diagnosis for each woman might have been the same. How the parties involved responded to the diagnosis -- and how JonCon relays the information about the diagnosis -- might be the source of the differences. And again - in context - JonCon is focusing on Elia being frail and almost dying in child birth -- and then goes on about her being unable to have more children. Why emphasize the sickliness if Elia merely became baren -- in that case her prior problems with the pregnancies would be irrelevant -- as she would be barren even if those pregnancies had gone perfectly. Being bed ridden and almost dying generally does not cause a woman to become infertile.

[purple-eyes]

3 minutes ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

I think the difference could be in the different narrators. The information about Naerys comes from a document being written by a maester. The information about Elia is coming from the thoughts of JonCon. So it would be understandable that the maester would focus on the technical diagnosis. While JonCon would focus on Elia's inability to give Rhaegar any more children.

The diagnosis for each woman might have been the same. How the parties involved responded to the diagnosis -- and how JonCon relays the information about the diagnosis -- might be the source of the differences. And again - in context - JonCon is focusing on Elia being frail and almost dying in child birth -- and then goes on about her being unable to have more children. Why emphasize the sickliness if Elia merely became baren -- in that case her prior problems with the pregnancies would be irrelevant -- as she would be barren even if those pregnancies had gone perfectly. Being bed ridden and almost dying generally does not cause a woman to become infertile.

Her barrenness can certainly related to her frail health. 

But any way, the point is, elia was declared that she would not have children. Period. No likely, no possibly. No next pregnancy. No next childbirth. 

Grrm wanted to tell us rhaegar has zero chance to get third child from elia. Thus gave him a reason to take action on lyanna. 

Why lyanna? Why not ashara? Why not other ladies on DS? 

It is surely much more risky to take lyanna than ashara. 

Love? Warrior mother for visenya? Ice for ice and fire? Or even lyanna herself asked him to do this? 

Do not know. All possible. 

[UnmaskedLurker]

4 minutes ago, purple-eyes said:

Her barrenness can certainly related to her frail health. 

But any way, the point is, elia was declared that she would not have children. Period. No likely, no possibly. No next pregnancy. No next childbirth. 

Grrm wanted to tell us rhaegar has zero chance to get third child from elia. Thus gave him a reason to take action on lyanna. 

Why lyanna? Why not ashara? Why not other ladies on DS? 

It is surely much more risky to take lyanna than ashara. 

Love? Warrior mother for visenya? Ice for ice and fire? Or even lyanna herself asked him to do this? 

Do not know. All possible. 

If the maesters said that having another child was almost certain to kill Elia -- I think most people would consider that information sufficient to conclude that if Rhaegar needed to have a third child, he should not try to get it from Elia. I think Elia also would agree that she would prefer that he have the third child with another woman and not put Elia in a position where she was almost certain to die.

[purple-eyes]

2 minutes ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

If the maesters said that having another child was almost certain to kill Elia -- I think most people would consider that information sufficient to conclude that if Rhaegar needed to have a third child, he should not try to get it from Elia. I think Elia also would agree that she would prefer that he have the third child with another woman and not put Elia in a position where she was almost certain to die.

That is my whole point. 

A convenient leeway to give rhaegar a reason to elope and whitewash his action. 

He did it because he had no choice! It is his wife's fault that she can not give one more child to him! Otherwise he would never take this stupid action! 

This is quite cheap writing honestly. I would prefer that paris abducted Helen because of her magical beauty and reward of alphoridoe. 

[UnmaskedLurker]

Just now, purple-eyes said:

That is my whole point. 

A convenient leeway to give rhaegar a reason to elope and whitewash his action. 

He did it because he had no choice! It is his wife's fault that she can not give one more child to him! Otherwise he would never take this stupid action! 

This is quite cheap writing honestly. I would prefer that paris abducted Helen because of her magical beauty and reward of alphoridoe. 

But your problem is equally true whether Rhaegar could not have a third child with Elia because she is infertile or because getting pregnant could kill her. Either way -- and we know one of these two possibilities is the case -- Rhaegar has an "excuse" to pursue another woman to bear a third child (if having a third child is really needed to save the world -- as Rhaegar seemed to believe). 

So why is the infertility interpretation more likely in your opinion than the risk of death alternative? Either explains why Rhaegar would need another woman to bear the third head. The risk of death explanation, however, also explains why Lyanna would believe that Rhaegar would be faithful to Lyanna and no longer have sex with Elia.

[purple-eyes]

31 minutes ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

But your problem is equally true whether Rhaegar could not have a third child with Elia because she is infertile or because getting pregnant could kill her. Either way -- and we know one of these two possibilities is the case -- Rhaegar has an "excuse" to pursue another woman to bear a third child (if having a third child is really needed to save the world -- as Rhaegar seemed to believe). 

So why is the infertility interpretation more likely in your opinion than the risk of death alternative? Either explains why Rhaegar would need another woman to bear the third head. The risk of death explanation, however, also explains why Lyanna would believe that Rhaegar would be faithful to Lyanna and no longer have sex with Elia.

So this is your purpose? To prove rhaegar will never have sex with elia? So that make him and lyanna look less selfish or more holy? 

You do know that sex life is different from child birth stuff, right? 

You know there is moon tea and also spilling outside which worked quite well in this universe right? 

You do know if elia gave her husband a blow job or hand job or whatever except cunt it will not cause a pregnancy right? 

Is this still counted as unfaithful to lyanna in your standard? 

You do know even an infertile woman (24 year old) can still need to and be able to have sex, ok? 

Seriously, some people should really stop trying to claim rhaegar can never ever have sex with elia since she will be risky in childbirth. 

Then claim he is a faithful husband. 

This is incredibly ridiculous. 

It is so ironic that people complained that elia is too weak to survive childbirth, but it is a strong and young lyanna who died right at her first childbirth. 

This is a great sarcasm I have to say. 

 

[purple-eyes]

My initial point is that grrm made elia barren is to give rhaegar a leeway. 

Of course, No matter it is that she can not get pregnant, or more childbirth will kill her, both can work for this purpose. 

But grrm used a more definite description to eliminate the vague possibility that elia may still manage to do it. Like naerys. Grrm did not say one more pregnancy might kill her for elia. Because this will give some possibility for rhaegar to do it with his wife. 

So he made a clear "no" on elia. this left rhaegar no choice than turning to another baby maker. Then people can blame elia for this. Oh, it is fault of elia. She can not satisfy rhaegar's need. That is why rhaegar run away. Etc. 

 

 

[The Prince of Magpies]

Just chiming in here as someone who was initially intrigued by A+J=T but reluctant to embrace it, and has recently been won over by the sterling arguments expressed in this thread. My reluctance stemmed from my investment in the Tyrion-Tywin relationship and the idea that Tyrion could be the perfect, prototypical Lannister, the perfect son that Tywin (the de facto arbiter of what constitutes a great Lannister) could never admit he had. To me, Tyrion discovering he was a Targaryen would mean casting off his Lannister identity and all the complexity that went along with it. 

However, as has been outlined here: (1) Tywin raising Tyrion makes him his father regardless of biology (2) Joanna being Tyrion's mother makes him as much Lannister as Targaryen. And it's this latter point that's really struck me as I've become more convinced of this theory, because it signals something of a trend or theme in the deconstruction of the sacredness of the patriarchal family line. Jon Snow's central conflict is centered on his desire to be a Stark while doubting that he can truly even be one, but the 'Stark-ness' that defines him actually comes from his mother rather than the man he believes is his father. Dany - and just about any Targaryen we've had an insight into - places huge stock in her ancestry, particularly her relation to Aegon I, yet tWoIaF gives us enough hints to reasonably suppose that he was sterile and the current Targaryen line's claim on Westeros rests on their descent from Rhaenys alone. And, in this case we have Tyrion who, like Jon, bases a huge part of his identity on his House while feeling frustrated and unsure of his ability to live up to its legacy. In Jon and Tyrion's cases, the knowledge that their 'fathers' (and their doubts over their fathers' feelings about them) need no longer figure into their identities as Stark and Lannister respectively could be liberating. While in Dany's case, the potential that the Targaryen lineage from which she draws so much strength comes from a woman, rather than a man's, line, tacitly supports her position as a female conqueror and - presumably? - progenitor of a new line of Targaryens.

Hardly, evidence for this theory, but it does present the possibility of some rich thematic appeal to it which certainly assuaged my reluctance to embrace it over the what initially seemed like the more interesting but conventional idea of Tywin being Tyrion's father.

[UnmaskedLurker]

3 minutes ago, The Prince of Magpies said:

Just chiming in here as someone who was initially intrigued by A+J=T but reluctant to embrace it, and has recently been won over by the sterling arguments expressed in this thread. My reluctance stemmed from my investment in the Tyrion-Tywin relationship and the idea that Tyrion could be the perfect, prototypical Lannister, the perfect son that Tywin (the de facto arbiter of what constitutes a great Lannister) could never admit he had. To me, Tyrion discovering he was a Targaryen would mean casting off his Lannister identity and all the complexity that went along with it. 

However, as has been outlined here: (1) Tywin raising Tyrion makes him his father regardless of biology (2) Joanna being Tyrion's mother makes him as much Lannister as Targaryen. And it's this latter point that's really struck me as I've become more convinced of this theory, because it signals something of a trend or theme in the deconstruction of the sacredness of the patriarchal family line. Jon Snow's central conflict is centered on his desire to be a Stark while doubting that he can truly even be one, but the 'Stark-ness' that defines him actually comes from his mother rather than the man he believes is his father. Dany - and just about any Targaryen we've had an insight into - places huge stock in her ancestry, particularly her relation to Aegon I, yet tWoIaF gives us enough hints to reasonably suppose that he was sterile and the current Targaryen line's claim on Westeros rests on their descent from Rhaenys alone. And, in this case we have Tyrion who, like Jon, bases a huge part of his identity on his House while feeling frustrated and unsure of his ability to live up to its legacy. In Jon and Tyrion's cases, the knowledge that their 'fathers' (and their doubts over their fathers' feelings about them) need no longer figure into their identities as Stark and Lannister respectively could be liberating. While in Dany's case, the potential that the Targaryen lineage from which she draws so much strength comes from a woman, rather than a man's, line, tacitly supports her position as a female conqueror and - presumably? - progenitor of a new line of Targaryens.

Hardly, evidence for this theory, but it does present the possibility of some rich thematic appeal to it which certainly assuaged my reluctance to embrace it over the what initially seemed like the more interesting but conventional idea of Tywin being Tyrion's father.

Welcome to A+J=T.   Interesting analysis (of which I largely agree -- not surprisingly). I have been fascinated with the number of people who think that no damage is done to the Jon-Ned dynamic by R+L=J, whereas the entire Tyrion-Tywin dynamic is ruined if Tyrion is not the biological son of Tywin. I also think your thematic observations about matrilineal inheritance is quite perceptive.

[Weirdo]

22 minutes ago, The Prince of Magpies said:

Just chiming in here as someone who was initially intrigued by A+J=T but reluctant to embrace it, and has recently been won over by the sterling arguments expressed in this thread. My reluctance stemmed from my investment in the Tyrion-Tywin relationship and the idea that Tyrion could be the perfect, prototypical Lannister, the perfect son that Tywin (the de facto arbiter of what constitutes a great Lannister) could never admit he had. To me, Tyrion discovering he was a Targaryen would mean casting off his Lannister identity and all the complexity that went along with it. 

However, as has been outlined here: (1) Tywin raising Tyrion makes him his father regardless of biology (2) Joanna being Tyrion's mother makes him as much Lannister as Targaryen. And it's this latter point that's really struck me as I've become more convinced of this theory, because it signals something of a trend or theme in the deconstruction of the sacredness of the patriarchal family line. Jon Snow's central conflict is centered on his desire to be a Stark while doubting that he can truly even be one, but the 'Stark-ness' that defines him actually comes from his mother rather than the man he believes is his father. Dany - and just about any Targaryen we've had an insight into - places huge stock in her ancestry, particularly her relation to Aegon I, yet tWoIaF gives us enough hints to reasonably suppose that he was sterile and the current Targaryen line's claim on Westeros rests on their descent from Rhaenys alone. And, in this case we have Tyrion who, like Jon, bases a huge part of his identity on his House while feeling frustrated and unsure of his ability to live up to its legacy. In Jon and Tyrion's cases, the knowledge that their 'fathers' (and their doubts over their fathers' feelings about them) need no longer figure into their identities as Stark and Lannister respectively could be liberating. While in Dany's case, the potential that the Targaryen lineage from which she draws so much strength comes from a woman, rather than a man's, line, tacitly supports her position as a female conqueror and - presumably? - progenitor of a new line of Targaryens.

Hardly, evidence for this theory, but it does present the possibility of some rich thematic appeal to it which certainly assuaged my reluctance to embrace it over the what initially seemed like the more interesting but conventional idea of Tywin being Tyrion's father.

Nice!

It's particularly poignant in Tyrion's case because not only did he have no relationship with his mother, he felt responsible for her death (as Tywin liked to reinforce by reminding him). If he learns that Tywin was not his father, he would need to somehow re-identify with his mother, since she is his connection to House Lannister. But he would have to get around the looming female role model of Cersei, who provided no love at all. Knowing she is only his half-sister might help with that. Then there is his early attempt at making a loving connection with a woman, Tysha, which ended in a horrific tragedy. Frankly, I think Tyrion is ripe to fall at Dany's feet and beg for her acceptance. He may not have to, if he tames a dragon before meeting her, but the motherlessness is always there with him, and it will be a major engine of their relationship, especially if you are right about this thematic device.

[The Prince of Magpies]

2 minutes ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

Welcome to A+J=T.   Interesting analysis (of which I largely agree -- not surprisingly). I have been fascinated with the number of people who think that no damage is done to the Jon-Ned dynamic by R+L=J, whereas the entire Tyrion-Tywin dynamic is ruined if Tyrion is not the biological son of Tywin. I also think your thematic observations about matrilineal inheritance is quite perceptive.

Thanks! I think part of the reluctance to embrace the idea that Tywin is not Tyrion's (biological) rather stems from the idea that it makes Tyrion's triumphs intertwined with Tywin's tragedy. The idea (as outlined in that wonderful speech from Genna to Jaime) that Tyrion is as good a son as Tywin could hope for but Tywin was simply to stubborn to embrace that. In this scenario Tywin is characterised by his myopic coldness towards Tyrion and all of Tyrion's displays of ingenuity, courage etc act as a rebuke against this. It's a complex scenario, but one which still remains consistent with most readers' interpretation of Tywin - that, for all his genius, his fundamental flaws were stubbornness and lack of compassion.

With R+L=J, Jon's feelings on Ned may shift (if only slightly) as he comes to terms with the knowledge of his true parents, but the readers' feelings on Ned (as a compassionate, honourable family man) will remain largely unchanged. However, as Lord Varys has argued, A+J=T opens up new possibilities for our feelings on Tywin: was he a better man than we thought for raising another man's son as his own? If so, does that mean we lose some of the dramatic irony of his son using his own gifts to destroy the very power base he (Tywin) helped establish because he never embraced that son like he could have? I would argue that A+J=T opens up as much complex possibilities as it discards, but it does seem (on first reading) to discard (or rather, cause significant reevaluation of) more of what many readers have assumed about characters, themes etc than R+L=J does.

[purple-eyes]

20 minutes ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

Welcome to A+J=T.   Interesting analysis (of which I largely agree -- not surprisingly). I have been fascinated with the number of people who think that no damage is done to the Jon-Ned dynamic by R+L=J, whereas the entire Tyrion-Tywin dynamic is ruined if Tyrion is not the biological son of Tywin. I also think your thematic observations about matrilineal inheritance is quite perceptive.

Because Ned/jon and Tywin/tyrion are completely different. 

Ned know he is foster father. Ned did not have concern that he was cuckholded. Ned did not blame jon for death of lyanna (he blamed her), Ned treated jon very well. Jon is not a dwarf. Jon did not kill Ned. Ned did not try to get rid of jon or ruin his wife or take his whore. 

Tywin's is whole different scenario.