Mythical Astronomy of Ice and Fire 5: Tyrion Targaryen

[Knight and Dayne]

On 6/3/2016 at 11:25 PM, LmL said:

Well, I have to say, I'm rather disappointed in the response to this one. I figured an essay called "Tyrion Targaryen" would draw some attention. I have 31 people following me, did any of you get some kind of notification when I posted this theory? I thought that's what is supposed to happen when people follow each other. I follow people, and have never got a notification when they post something new. O great and powerful @Ran, am I misunderstanding what the deal is with the following? If people who have chosen to follow you aren't notified when you post a theory, what is the point of this feature? Ostensibly, people choose to follow someone because they want to know when that person posts something new - that's certainly my wish when I follow people. I was excited when I saw that the new board had this feature, but it doesn't seem to be working.  

Quick turnaround from the last one. I'm certainly excited/disappointed this one almost fell through the cracks. Looking forward to listening in the next few days.

Also, I feel your pain re: disappointing response. Wonder if the show is sucking some of the energy out of the boards at the moment...

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

@LmL,

Thank you for tagging me! And sorry it took a while (again) to respond, but I have been rather busy, and wanted to take the time to write a good reply.

 

That Tyrion is associated with gargoyles cannot be denied. He's called a gargoyle too many times for it to be a coincidence, he fits the two main functions of a gargoyle (guiding the water, as he did in Casterly Rock at the age of 16, and protecting against evil, as he does on multiple occasions, e.g. Battle of the Blackwater), and he is associated with the "bringing luck" as gargoyles do:

Out front squatted a waist-high gargoyle, so eroded by rain and salt that his features were all but obliterated. He and Davos were old friends, though. He gave a pat to the stone head as he went in. "Luck," he murmured. (A Clash of Kings, Davos I)

 

One of the tigers spied the dwarf and said something that made the others laugh. As they reached the gate, he pulled off his clawed gauntlet and the sweaty glove beneath, locked one arm around the dwarf's neck, and roughly rubbed his head. Tyrion was too startled to resist. It was all over in a heartbeat. "Was there some reason for that?" he demanded of the Halfmaester.

"He says that it is good luck to rub the head of a dwarf," Haldon said after an exchange with the guard in his own tongue. (A Dance with Dragons, Tyrion VI)

It is too clear to be a coincidence, that is certain. That leaves us with the question of what it means.

You immediately connect gargoyles with dagons, based on history of gargoyles, but why not look at the gargoyles described in ASOIAF? Those are the ones that GRRM wants his readers to see, after all. 

The gargoyles specifically described in ASOIAF are "they might once have been lions", wyverns, hellhounds, griffins, demons, manticores, minotaurs, basilisks, cockatrices, and "a thousand queerer creatures". I might have missed a reference, but I did not see a dragon gargoyle mentioned in the text, appearing anywhere. In fact, Dragonstone, the place with the highest density of gargoyles we've seen thus far, appears to be made up of buildings in the shape of dragons, and next to that the aforementioned gargoyles:

The child had been plagued by nightmares as far back as Maester Cressen could recall. "We have talked of this before," he said gently. "The dragons cannot come to life. They are carved of stone, child. In olden days, our island was the westernmost outpost of the great Freehold of Valyria. It was the Valyrians who raised this citadel, and they had ways of shaping stone since lost to us. A castle must have towers wherever two walls meet at an angle, for defense. The Valyrians fashioned these towers in the shape of dragons to make their fortress seem more fearsome, just as they crowned their walls with a thousand gargoyles instead of simple crenellations." He took her small pink hand in his own frail spotted one and gave it a gentle squeeze. "So you see, there is nothing to fear."

The towers are shaped as dragons, but the gargoyles..? Cressen does not identify them (and who can blame him? There are a thousand to be found!) Davos later does identify them for us, however:

He raised his eyes to gaze up at the walls. In place of merlons, a thousand grotesques and gargoyles looked down on him, each different from all the others; wyverns, griffins, demons, manticores, minotaurs, basilisks, hellhounds, cockatrices, and a thousand queerer creatures sprouted from the castle's battlements as if they'd grown there. And the dragons were everywhere. The Great Hall was a dragon lying on its belly. Men entered through its open mouth. The kitchens were a dragon curled up in a ball, with the smoke and steam of the ovens vented through its nostrils. The towers were dragons hunched above the walls or poised for flight; the Windwyrm seemed to scream defiance, while Sea Dragon Tower gazed serenely out across the waves. Smaller dragons framed the gates. Dragon claws emerged from walls to grasp at torches, great stone wings enfolded the smith and armory, and tails formed arches, bridges, and exterior stairs.

I think that especially the Davos chapters suggest that there are no dragon-gargoyles, but only dragon-statues to be found on Dragonstone (as well as buildings and towers shaped like dragons, as described above).

Heat rose shimmering through the chill air; behind, the gargoyles and stone dragons on the castle walls seemed blurred, as if Davos were seeing them through a veil of tears.

"Gargoyles and stone dragons". The fact that Davos sees the need to distinguish, I take it that the stone dragons here are not gargoyles, but statues, just as the "smaller dragons" mentioned in the quote above, framing the gate.

 

Tyrion is clearly connected to gargoyles, but what does it mean? It is interesting to realise that, while gargoyles will most likely be found all over Westeros, only gargoyles at Winterfell and Dragonstone are actually described (not King's Landing!). That seems important as well. As stated before, one of the main functions of a gargoyle is to "protect against evil". And I do think that that is connected here as well.

Is it a hint that Tyrion, the gargoyle, is supposed to protect both the Bastard of Winterfell as well as the Princess of Dragonstone?  I'd say that it is entirely possible, and in line with several other hints surrounding Tyrion thusfar.

For example, this one that you mentioned:

Quote

I also wouldn’t be surprised to see him play a similar protective role to Daenerys.  In fact, there’s a clue about Tyrion helping Dany in The World of Ice and Fire.  One story from Yi Ti is that “a woman with a monkey’s tail” somehow helped to end the Long Night.  A tail is also the name for the attendants of a monarch, and a monkey for a tail might be Tyrion as an advisor to a woman who might help end the new Long Night – Daenerys.
 

An interesting fact that I was unaware of.

But it is not the only thing. This quote is most likely very much well-known to you:

The eunuch rubbed his powdered hands together. “May I leave you with a bit of a riddle, Lord Tyrion?” He did not wait for an answer. “In a room sit three great men, a king, a priest, and a rich man with his gold. Between them stands a sellsword, a little man of common birth and no great mind. Each of the great ones bids him slay the other two. ‘Do it’ says the king, ‘for I am your lawful ruler.’ ‘Do it’ says the priest, ‘for I command you in the names of the gods.’ ‘Do it’ says the rich man, ‘and all this gold shall be yours.’ So tell me-who lives and who dies?”

[...]

Varys smiled. “Here, then. Power resides where men believe it resides. No more and no less.”
“So power is a mummer’s trick?”
“A shadow on the wall,” Varys murmured, “yet shadows can kill. And ofttimes a very small man can cast a very large shadow.”

That Tyrion can cast a large shadow, we know:

When he opened the door, the light from within threw his shadow clear across the yard, and for just a moment Tyrion Lannister stood tall as a king.

 

So, is Tyrion the riddle? If so, it links Tyrion to the sphinx, as mentioned by @Elisabetta Duò in the AJT thread, who additionally mentions that sphinxes too are guardians. It would make Tyrion a guardian and a protector, and I'd say that this might be a role he will play amongst the dragons he will find himself surrounded with.

“Dragons,” Moqorro said in the Common Tongue of Westeros. He spoke it very well, with hardly a trace of accent. No doubt that was one reason the high priest Benerro had chosen him to bring the faith of R’hllor to Daenerys Targaryen. “Dragons old and young, true and false, bright and dark. And you. A small man with a big shadow, snarling in the midst of all.”

You say

Quote

Why is Tyrion in the midst of dragons here?  He doesn’t sound like a victim, but rather more like a dragon himself: he’s got a big shadow and he snarls.  Sounds like he is a part of the great dragon dance, to me.  If nothing else, this quote indicates that Tyrion’s fate will be intertwined with various types of dragons and dragon people.

I agree on the last sentence.. Tyrion's future will involve the dancing "dragons", or, Targaryens. Waring dragons, most likely. But I disagree that the quote makes him sound like a dragon himself. In fact, Moqorro specifies dragons, "and you. A small man with a big shadow, [...]". Why specifically identify Tyrion as a small man, when speaking of dragons, if Tyrion is supposed to be one of those dragons as well? If Tyrion was supposed to be one of those dragons, why not keep the language vague (i.e. leave out "man")? E.g. "And you, small but with a big shadow, snarling in the midst of all."

Similarly to the "gargoyles and stone dragons"... If the stone dragons are gargoyles, why identify them as something completely separate? 

Again, in this quote we see Tyrion's association again with the big shadow, and thus, the association with "power resides where men believe it resides".

 

As to the cyvasse-symbolism.. I've research that quite extensively, a year and a half ago, and even wrote an essay about it (A Game of Thrones, A Game of Cyvasse). Perhaps some part of it would benefit from a bit of rewriting, but the essence is still there. The important part of it that I'd like to adress, is in response to this (in a spoiler tag, as it adresses a slight Winds spoiler):

Spoiler

The white cyvasse dragon ended up at Tyrion’s feet. He scooped it off the carpet and wiped it on his sleeve, but some of the Yunkish blood had collected in the fine grooves of the carving, so the pale wood seemed veined with red. “All hail our beloved queen, Daenerys.” Be she alive or be she dead. He tossed the bloody dragon in the air, caught it, grinned. “We have always been the queen’s men,” announced Brown Ben Plumm. “Rejoining the Yunkai’i was just a ploy.”

“And what a clever ploy it was.” Tyrion gave the dead man a shove with his boot. “If that breastplate fits, I want it.”  

Viserion, the white dragon, has just been flying above the battle scene and eating corpses as they are flung into the air by the catapults – so I think there can be little doubt that this bloody white dragon which Tyrion claims is a reference to Viserion, if it’s a reference to anything.  There’s also a link drawn to weirwood, pale wood veined with red – and of course, this makes be think of Bloodraven, who’s sigil is a white dragon, and who is transforming into a weirwood.  There’s a whole mysterious connection between white dragons and weirwood – you’ll notice this coloring matches Ghost’s as well – and that we will have to save for another day.

But the chess analogy here is quite clear: Tyrion deploys the chess pieces just as Tywin deploys his army.  Tywin’s army is a black iron rose, and Tyrion’s is a bloody white dragon.  This connection was reinforced with a line earlier, which was Tyrion saying “This is just a cyvasse game to the Wise Masters. We’re the pieces.  They have that in common with my lord father, these slavers.”  We are the pieces, he says, and the pieces are a bloody white dragon.  Tyrion is a bloody white dragon, in other words, and perhaps he will ride one too, deploying it like a chess piece to protect his dragon queen.  Tyrion tosses the dragon into the air – that’s where you ride them, after all – and says ‘all hail queen Daenerys.’

Last but not least, Tyrion wants the armor of the dead sun figure, the one with all those depraved scenes, despite the fact that it might have blood and black oil on it.  Tyrion has always wanted that magic armor from Valyria, right?  As a monkey demon following in the tradition of Sun Wukong, he needs a suit of magic armor.  Earlier, Tyrion remarks that he’d be like Tywin, if only he had that splendid armor.  Well, he’s getting the armor of the sun, but it’s the armor of a dead sun – the dead solar king we know as the black dragon, Azor Ahai reborn.

Attentive listeners will remember that we quoted a scene earlier where Tyrion plays cyvasse with Young Griff, a.k.a. probably fAegon Blackfyre, and Tyrion was noted to move the black dragon around the board instead of the white in this scene.  Like chess, cyvasse has a black and a white “wooden army,” as they are called, and it’s interesting to compare Tyrion’s role as dragon advisor in the two scenes.  When he had the black dragon, the yin side if you will, he was deceiving Young Griff, both on the game board and his strategic advice and manipulation.  In this scene here with the white dragon, it certainly appears that Tyrion genuinely is on team Daenerys.  This recalls Sun Wukong’s nature as a trickster god who can push the balance in either direction.
 

I do doubt the bolded part.

As I explain in my essay, what can be clearly seen, is that, when the colors of a characters cyvasse pieces are described (that is not always the case), we see the use of white and black. This can be seen four times:

• Not an actual game, but highly symbolic nonetheless, is Doran Martell's discussion with his daughter Arianne in The Princess in the Tower. Doran sits on the side of the black pieces, Arianne on the side of the white. Doran "wins".
• Tyrion Lannister vs Aegon Targaryen: Tyrion uses onyx, Aegon uses alabaster. Tyrion wins.
• Qavo Nogarys vs “the big man”: Qavo uses onyx pieces, his opponent uses alabaster pieces. Qavo wins.
• Qavo Nogarys vs Tyrion Lannister: Qavo uses onyx pieces, Tyrion uses alabaster. Qavo wins.

 

What can be seen in each of these cases is that the character who associates with the black pieces, is associated with a "win". Consider this: Doran Martell calls his daughter out of captivity with as his goal to get her to help him convince Myrcella Baratheon to lie to Ser Balon Swann. Meanwhile, Arianne's goal is to learn who has betrayed her plot. Doran, sitting on the side of the black cyvasse pieces, "wins", by being able to convince Arianne to instruct Myrcella to lie. Meanwhile, Arianne, sitting on the side of the white cyvasse pieces, "loses", as in "does not achieve her original goal" by not learning who has betrayed her.

Tyrion, in his "battle" against Aegon, attempts to convince Aegon to abandon his quest for Daenerys. He achieves this goal, playing with the black pieces, by indeed convincing the prince to do so (as he learns a few chapters later).

When Qavo and Tyrion "face" each other, Qavo "defeats" Tyrion and Haldon (while using the onyx pieces) by informing them that Daenerys is not traveling west, as they had been hoping, and instead informs them that Daenerys's enemies are gathering to fight against her.

The conclusion I draw from this, is that being associated with the black cyvasse pieces indicates a "win", both in the 'actual cyvasse game', as in the underlying message. 

Which brings me back to the spoiler-tag needed passage:

Spoiler

The cyvasse game in Tyrion II is just standing there in the tent. No one is playing with it, no one is even near it, no one is associated with it. Until the Yunkish messenger walks in. When he is killed, he is the one who falls against the cyvasse game, smearing his blood all over the white dragon (the most powerful piece in the game). And that is the one that Tyrion eventually picks up.

 

I'd say that, in accordance with what I've written above, the white cyvasse dragon in Plumm's tent symblizes the loss of the Yunkish (a bloody loss), symbolized by the blood smeared across the white cyvasse dragon. As the dragon is the "most powerful piece", I'd even suggest that this loss is due to the Yunkish losign theri most powerful "piece". As I suggest in my essay, it is possibly connected to the sellswords. The sellswords are ordered to guard the trebuchets. And what do we see? It is not only the Second Sons who switch sides, betraying the Yunkish, but also the Windblown.  From an earlier Tyrion chapter:

Tyrion almost grabbed his dragon but thought better of it. Last game he had brought her out too soon and lost her to a trebuchet.

This quote shows that Tyrion has learned from the mistakes he made previously while playing "the game". Is this what we will witness during the Battle for Meereen? Tyrion played a role in the Second Sons switching sides. He attempted to convince Plumm, and Plumm eventually decided to do so after learning the Windblown had switched sides as well. So, perhaps the fact that Tyrion is the one to pick up the white dragon associates him with the future loss of the trebuchets of Yunkai.

 

[LmL]

17 hours ago, Flying Cat said:

Hi @LML,

i have read your Tyrion Targaryen post (excellent, as always), and am a bit surprised that you didn´t mention his near-death experience in the Rhoyne. With all the parallels of sea-dragons and meteors falling into the water I thought you would jump on that one! Escpecially since the rock metaphors go off the charts with all them stonemen around, falling on the boat and stuff 

 

This is a great example of how difficult it is to do any kind of short analysis of George's work. I made a two hour podcast just covering gargoyles, Sun Wukong, dragon dreams, and a bit of Winterfell, and I didn't get into the sphinx idea, the Lann the Clever parallels, or yes, Tyrion's experience on the Rhoyne. I'm glad that you spotted all that on your own however - it shows you've got a good grip on the ideas and symbolism.  Every time this happens - when people catch things I haven't and bring them back to me - it's like my favorite thing ever. There are so many scenes in the book, and I have a lot of them stored in my memory banks, but I kind of spaced on that whole scene there. I haven't done an analysis of it yet and I also don't understand what George is doing with the grayscale. I tend to work off of the passages I feel I understand the best, so as to present a strong and coherent theory. I'll have to go back and take a look, but on first glance, yeah - Tyrion plunges into the river, an idea which is connected to turning into stone. Jon Con is a really interesting bag of symbolism too, with his fiery hair and griffin reborn status (he's also "riding" a dragon, fAegon), but has blue eyes which I am 99% sure are called icy, and he wears wold pelts a lot. It's very like Stannis the blue eyed king with a red sword. There is some stage in Azor Ahai's life where he became somewhat icy, I believe is the message, and if AA = NK, this has to be the case anyway. But I digress.

17 hours ago, Flying Cat said:

A lot of people complain about A+J=T because they think this somehow invalidates Tywin as a father figure for Tyrion (with all the parallels and complexity about their relationship just magically gone). I think this is as stupid as invalidating Ned as Jons Father. Independently of R+L=J, the guy that was there for Jon was Ned, the guy he draws his example form, the guy who, in short, raised him, was Ned.  Without beating around the bush: sticking it into a lady and making a baby is not the difficult part. Everyone can do that. Raising a person is the difficult thing, and all the glory and failures in the process is what shapes a person to become who she is.  So that was a long way of saying: A+J=T and R+L=J only have an impact on a political (in this setting also metaphysical) level, but it won´t change the personality of either Tyrion nor Jon.

Radio Westeros said the same ting on their Tywin episode and I wholeheartedly agree. Ned will always be Jon's father. Ask any adopted person who their "father" or "mother" is and they answer without any hesitation. You parents are the ones who raise you, period. Tyrion is Twyin's true son as Genna says because he learned from Tywin and has certain motivations in common - chiefly, the fear / hatred of being laughed at. The fact that he was never Aerys son (if A+J=T) is simply ironic and interesting. Tywin always wanted to disown Tyrion but never could because of his family pride... but Tyrion wasn't his son. I think that's exactly the sort of thing GRRM finds amusing. 

The old "but it ruins his relationship with Tywin!" argument pops up a lot, and I don't blame people for making it, but I think you just have to think about it a little harder and you'll see very clearly what we are talking about - it's all about who raised you. The point of the genetics os for magical lineage, because this is fantasy. The point of making Tyrion a Targaryen, if that's what George has done, seems clear - because he's intended to ride a dragon. 

17 hours ago, Flying Cat said:

Also

  Reveal hidden contents

congrats on your post on reddit about the obsidian/black oily stone the CotF used to create the NK (at least on the show). Good stuff. I´m sure you have sorted this all out already, but my thoughts on the timeline would be something on the lines of: BSE brings down the second moon. Oily black stones fall all over the place. He uses them for his purpose, CotF find some too and (at least a faction of them) decide to use it too, maybe to take back what mankind had taken from them. The Long night might be a secondary and unexpected effect from the portion of oily black stone that fell in what now is the land of always winter or from whatever the CotF did.

Looking forward to more of your stuff, I´m glad you are starting to get the props you deserve for your awesome work 

Cheers

Regarding your thoughts on the timeline, yeah, that's one of the strong possibilities I am seeing to. Something along those lines.

[LmL]

9 hours ago, Cowboy Dan said:

@LmLI read this real late the night you first posted a link in the pt. 4 thread. Upon re-reading it seems I misremembered a fair amount since last week at 3 in the morning so feel free to ignore my last post. Hell, you even said it's not a one-to-one comparison.. not really sure what I was thinking lol

Right on @Cowboy Dan, I appreciate you saying so. Water under the bridge! 

9 hours ago, Cowboy Dan said:

Follow-up questions: First, regarding the TWOW quote.

  Reveal hidden contents

The yunkishman near the end has black oily hair and lies face down. You said he's a solar figure because of the yellow then said he's a black moon meteor weapon. Isn't it more in line with the Blood Betrayal (he's literally betrayed, stabbed in the back, and blood gets everywhere) coupled with the Maiden Made of Light (moon figure) who turned her face from the sun (lies face down), a moon that becomes red and bloody then turns dark? I guess I'm a little confused by this section because usually the sun figure / 2 moons symbolism is a bit more direct. Perhaps the key to decoding it is further along in TWOW?

I totally understand why this isn't clear, and I think my explanation might have been a bit threadbare. Here's the deal, as I see it. 

We have a sun and the second moon as the two most important figures. The surviving moon is something of a bystander, although it seems to have undergone changes as well, but that's another story. We have characters who play the sun role, and characters who play the second moon role. The things which represent post-impact Lightbringer - the black meteors, the waves of night and blood, all the moon-destruciton fallout basically - these are the children of sun and moon. Therefore, what we see is a sun character with a symbol hinting at one of these manifestations of black lightbringer calamities. The solar characters often have this river of darkness idea hinted - Drogo's oily black hair which is like a river of darkness, Jon's rivers of black ice, Oberyn's oily black blade, and Tywin's army which is like an unfolding iron rose with gleaming thorns. The moon becomes the black weapon of the sun after the sun strikes and transforms the moon, and so we see solar characters wielding these black weapons. A man decked out in yellow whom Tyrion feels almost as kin to points toward a solar character. His black oily roses for hair is like a combination of Drogo's oily river of darkness hair and Tywin's black iron rose. 

The moon meteors falling from the sky drank the sun's fire, and I believe the "second son" motif refers to the idea of the meteor firestorm being like a second sun in the sky. So, although the moon is the one who falls, yes, it can also be seen as falling pieces of sun. That's the whole reason why the eclipse alignment works so well to tell Martin's story, which is meant to have these overtones of procreation. The meteors represent the children of sun and moon, and they fall from the place in the sky where both the sun and moon were. That's why they can also be sun-spears. Or recall the torn Lannister banner I talked about at the end of the Mountain and the Viper episode - the lion banner is town by the mob and the pieces flutter away like a thousand red leaves in a storm wind. 

So when this oily-rose headed Yunkishman

falls across the chessboard and then we have blood and black oil spreading across the board,

it's just another way of depicting the black and bloody tide being triggered by the landing of the black meteors. Recall also that the heliotrope flower ideas make the moon a flower - which makes sense, since it's mostly a feminine symbol, the moon - so Tywin's iron rose and the oily roses in dude's hair represent the moon as the sun's weapon. This also plays into the theme of black crowns, which you know I identify with the "dark solar king" archetype. 

9 hours ago, Cowboy Dan said:

Second: you say Tyrion is a Targaryen but then point to parallels between him and Tywin, which seems to hint at what Genna said, that Tyrion is Tywin's son. You even pointed to them being twins (in GRRM's words) which seems to fit with a thought from Tyrion's first chapter as well:

If Tyrion and Tywin are 'twins' it seems to hint that Tyrion was going to kill Tywin. He can only handle one of himself, only makes sense he'd off Tywin. Unless Tywin is also a secret Targ I don't see how, thematically speaking, Tyrion is Tywin's son but also a Targaryen. For me that's always been the biggest flaw with Tyrion Targaryen.

I'll refer you to my remarks in the previous comment about Tywin and Tyrion, speaking in terms of fatherly themes. I agree with your observations about there not being enough room in the world for two Tyrion's - that's a clever catch. I simply don't see it as conflicting with Tyrion Targaryen theory. He is Tywin's son because Tywin raised him, not his actual genetic paternity. 

9 hours ago, Cowboy Dan said:

I'd like to clarify that I'm agnostic about your essays: I really enjoy the idea and would like to think it's right but I'm not fully convinced. Skepticism is just a trait of mine so don't try to take it personally, as I said, I really like your analyses

I appreciate that a lot actually! It's very healthy to practice intaking information without immediately trying to decide if it is true or not. I read the entire carlos Castaneda series like that and it worked quite well. How much is true? It doesn't mater, the lessons in those books are like parables. Is the Bible / Koran / other holy book "true" or "not true?" Neither. It's not meant to be understood in those terms. Anyway, I'm going off on a tangent, but basically I think it's healthy to consider ideas as "possible" and just leave them there until they sort themselves out. I am quite sure I don't have everything right, but I do feel confident in the broad strokes of the theory - that Martin is creating celestial metaphors in his text to tell a story about the Long Night, and that story has something to do with a moon disaster event and meteor impacts. I am kind of always reinforcing that basic premise no matter what I am analyzing, and I feel like even if folks are skeptical about any one passage having a double meaning, the sum totality of scenes which show sun people "penetrating" moon people to give birth to some kind of Lightbringer-related idea are pretty hard to deny without concluding that I am totally bonkers and hallucinating this entire thing. And you know, if that turns out to be the case - well I should probably be writing fantasy, or at least trying to, lol, cause I hallucinated some pretty cool shit.

I do plan on writing my own fantasy - I've been world-building and test writing characters and building arcs and whatnot... I think at least 50% of the people on these boards are writing a fantasy novel, so there it is. 

Thanks again for giving my ideas a chance, even with your skeptical brain screaming out like a rusty hinge in the background. 

[LmL]

19 hours ago, Lady Fishbiscuit said:

Another fascinating read @LmL.  

Woo! Happy to oblige. Although I will say if you don't listen to the podcast version of this, you're missing out on the amazing voice acting of my friend Paige, who does an amazing Tyrion and a haunting Maester-Aemon-on-his-deathbed.

19 hours ago, Lady Fishbiscuit said:

I had picked up on some of Tyrion's gargoyle and dragon symbolism, but not to the extent that you have. Great to see it gathered together and analysed in the context of the Tyrion Targ theory.  I was always a believer and this has just made me more convinced.  There's too much of this throughout the books for it not to mean anything and I think Tyrion becoming a dragon rider but not being revealed as a Targ would be odd considering all the dragon riders we've ever been told of have Valyrian blood.

I agree. I don't think any one thing is irrefutable, but in totality, I think it's far more likely than not. As you say, the thing that makes the most sense is that he is a Targ because he needs to be a dragonrider. I mean there's just to much of the "I feel kinda like Aegon!" "Next he'll offer magic armor and a place in Valyria!" "I oft rode dragons through the night in the bowels of Casterly Rock" "I dream about dragons, dragons have been oft on my brain of late, and look, that cloud looks like a dragon." It's just a damn lot of supposedly idle comments which scream out the same thing. At this point I am foolish enough to imagine I have something of a sense for Martin's sense of humor and his style of foreshadowing, and this all seems pretty clear. With all due respect, most of the resistance to Tyrion Targ theory seems based on personal feelings, not narrative arguments or refutation of evidence. It usually boils down to "I just don't think / want him to be a Targ." I don't really care one way or the other, but I find the evidence to be fairly strong. 

Then again, I'm not a overly skeptical person.

19 hours ago, Lady Fishbiscuit said:

The Sun Wukong Monkey Demon symbolism was new to me (apart from watching the 'Monkey' TV show as a kid in the 70s), but clearly not new to George! Really enjoyed your analysis here and the long night parallels piling up before our eyes. I hope this doesn't foreshadow Tyrion inadvertently causing disaster rather than triumphing (as  I really hope he will).  As for the Thundarr cartoon title sequence... That might as well have said "Previously, on Planetos...".  Fantastic! 

That thunder clip really dropped my jaw when I first had someone point it out to me, I'm sure you can imagine.It was early on in the process too, when I only had a smidgen of the evidence gathered that I do now, so it was really incredible to see a red comet fly by a planet's moon and cause damage to it resulting in cataclysmic meteor impacts on earth.  And since we know George loves comics and old quirky things like Thundarr, it's pretty easy to believe he pulled something from that. And of course, there's Thundarr's glowing "sun sword." 

Sun Wukong challenged and fucked up heaven for a time, but of course he did eventually become a Buddha and a protector figure. So I'd say there's plenty of hope for Tyrion. Of course George doesn't do one to one adaptations, so we really don't know what he's going to do. But I think we can already see that Tyrion is a fulcrum around whom others turn, like Sun Wukong, and that he's very intelligent and sage-like, again like Sun Wukong, and he certainly challenges authority with defiance like Sun Wukong. 

19 hours ago, Lady Fishbiscuit said:

Iike @Cowboy Dan, I'm really curious about the connection between Targs and Starks (as highlighted by your point about gargoyles being seemingly only identified at Winterfell, Dragonstone and KL).

Just to clarify, and @Rhaenys_Targaryen mentioned this too, King's Landing doesn't have gargoyles. I was merely pouting out that the penultimate gargoyle / monkey demon Tyrion scene comes with him perched on the walls of King's Landing like a gargoyle. He perched on WF, and Cersei made the remark comparing him to the gargoyles on WF, so George has drawn a link between these three places in that context, but I am not suggesting KL has gargoyles - it doesn't. 

19 hours ago, Lady Fishbiscuit said:

We're shown time and again in the books how the people south of the neck have no interest in the North and see the northerners as almost foreign and savage.  King Robert didn't visit the North at all during his reign (until the last few months), despite his oldest BFF being Warden of the North.  However, the Targs seem to be the exception.  Among other things, we have the much hinted R+L, we have Bloodraven and Aemon both joining the Nights Watch, Bloodraven's link to the COTF & Bran, and we're also told tales of the Targs of old visiting the north and visiting the wall, just like Tyrion does.  Tyrion seems to have a keen interest in the Starks and the Nights Watch and develops an empathy and understanding with them (Jon, Bran and Sansa in particular). I don't think this is a coincidence.  This could be all tied in with the Valyrians having the same ancestry as AA, connecting both them and the Starks to the Long Night and the fabled pact.  The First Men, who the Starks descend from also originated from Essos, so maybe both families share ancestry going back to the GEOTD.

Agree with all of this. We have many examples of dragons coming north, and there's also interesting parallel character like Vorian Dayne, the Sword of the Evening, who was sent to the Wall. As I pointed out, everything about the King of Winter speaks of a man who fights the cold with fiery things. Winterfell is an oasis of warmth in the middle of the frozen north.  The Azor Ahai story is really only relevant if it relates to the Long Night in Westeros and the Last Hero (and therefore the Starks in all likelihood), as I pointed out in this essay-cast. I definitely think there is a connection. 

Basically, the term "First Men" might well be an umbrella term for multiple waves of immigrants from different places. 

[LmL]

12 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

@LmL,

Thank you for tagging me! And sorry it took a while (again) to respond, but I have been rather busy, and wanted to take the time to write a good reply.

I notice that your response consists entirely of attempting to refute evidence pointing towards Tyrion being a Targaryen.  So I take it you are already not a believer? I'll respond to the issues you are raising here but keep in mind that my goal is not to debate all the details of AJT, and I do not think I have "proved" anything conclusive with any of my analysis, merely added to the pile of things that would make a lot more sense if A+J=T. I realize many things could be interpreted different ways. But the more things pile up which you have to try hard to interpret in specific ways to avoid the conclusion of AJT, the more it seems like a stretch to me to deny that it's a strong possibility. I think the dragon dreams and supposedly off-hand remarks about Tyrion felling Aegon the C. or being a lost Targaryen princeling are conclusive enough, even without the dragon associations of the gargoyle and Sun Wukong.  

12 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

 

That Tyrion is associated with gargoyles cannot be denied. He's called a gargoyle too many times for it to be a coincidence, he fits the two main functions of a gargoyle (guiding the water, as he did in Casterly Rock at the age of 16, and protecting against evil, as he does on multiple occasions, e.g. Battle of the Blackwater), and he is associated with the "bringing luck" as gargoyles do:

Out front squatted a waist-high gargoyle, so eroded by rain and salt that his features were all but obliterated. He and Davos were old friends, though. He gave a pat to the stone head as he went in. "Luck," he murmured. (A Clash of Kings, Davos I)

 

One of the tigers spied the dwarf and said something that made the others laugh. As they reached the gate, he pulled off his clawed gauntlet and the sweaty glove beneath, locked one arm around the dwarf's neck, and roughly rubbed his head. Tyrion was too startled to resist. It was all over in a heartbeat. "Was there some reason for that?" he demanded of the Halfmaester.

"He says that it is good luck to rub the head of a dwarf," Haldon said after an exchange with the guard in his own tongue. (A Dance with Dragons, Tyrion VI)

It is too clear to be a coincidence, that is certain. That leaves us with the question of what it means.

You immediately connect gargoyles with dagons, based on history of gargoyles, but why not look at the gargoyles described in ASOIAF? Those are the ones that GRRM wants his readers to see, after all. 

I agree we always look first at the in-book lore, but with someone who draws so freely from things outside his own lore, I never hesitate to examine the external influences when he calls out to them. I don't believe in casting shade on this technique either, which some people do. He is begging us to follow his influences - it's a way of paying homage to things he likes. I so no conflict, either, in doing both, and that's what I have always done in all of my writings. I only look for the ideas in the external myths which seem represented in ASOIAF. When I find correlations, that's when I start writing about them. 

12 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

The gargoyles specifically described in ASOIAF are "they might once have been lions", wyverns, hellhounds, griffins, demons, manticores, minotaurs, basilisks, cockatrices, and "a thousand queerer creatures". I might have missed a reference, but I did not see a dragon gargoyle mentioned in the text, appearing anywhere. In fact, Dragonstone, the place with the highest density of gargoyles we've seen thus far, appears to be made up of buildings in the shape of dragons, and next to that the aforementioned gargoyles:

The child had been plagued by nightmares as far back as Maester Cressen could recall. "We have talked of this before," he said gently. "The dragons cannot come to life. They are carved of stone, child. In olden days, our island was the westernmost outpost of the great Freehold of Valyria. It was the Valyrians who raised this citadel, and they had ways of shaping stone since lost to us. A castle must have towers wherever two walls meet at an angle, for defense. The Valyrians fashioned these towers in the shape of dragons to make their fortress seem more fearsome, just as they crowned their walls with a thousand gargoyles instead of simple crenellations." He took her small pink hand in his own frail spotted one and gave it a gentle squeeze. "So you see, there is nothing to fear."

The towers are shaped as dragons, but the gargoyles..? Cressen does not identify them (and who can blame him? There are a thousand to be found!) Davos later does identify them for us, however:

He raised his eyes to gaze up at the walls. In place of merlons, a thousand grotesques and gargoyles looked down on him, each different from all the others; wyverns, griffins, demons, manticores, minotaurs, basilisks, hellhounds, cockatrices, and a thousand queerer creatures sprouted from the castle's battlements as if they'd grown there. And the dragons were everywhere. The Great Hall was a dragon lying on its belly. Men entered through its open mouth. The kitchens were a dragon curled up in a ball, with the smoke and steam of the ovens vented through its nostrils. The towers were dragons hunched above the walls or poised for flight; the Windwyrm seemed to scream defiance, while Sea Dragon Tower gazed serenely out across the waves. Smaller dragons framed the gates. Dragon claws emerged from walls to grasp at torches, great stone wings enfolded the smith and armory, and tails formed arches, bridges, and exterior stairs.

I think that especially the Davos chapters suggest that there are no dragon-gargoyles, but only dragon-statues to be found on Dragonstone (as well as buildings and towers shaped like dragons, as described above).

Heat rose shimmering through the chill air; behind, the gargoyles and stone dragons on the castle walls seemed blurred, as if Davos were seeing them through a veil of tears.

"Gargoyles and stone dragons". The fact that Davos sees the need to distinguish, I take it that the stone dragons here are not gargoyles, but statues, just as the "smaller dragons" mentioned in the quote above, framing the gate.

I think you're parsing words here in a way that doesn't make sense to me. What I see are the dragons serving the exact same purpose as gargoyles, and being grouped together with the gargoyles. They are all hellish stone beasts who sit on the walls of the keep. Davos talks about seeing them both seeming to stir. I don't see that naming them one after another indicates they aren't of the same nature; on the contrary, they are of the same nature. They are all monstrous hell beasts. All made of stone. All seeming to wake. All sitting on the walls. They are repeatedly mentioned in the same breath - the stone dragons and gargoyles. They are grouped together. 

The important elements here - waking from stone, associations with fire - are shared by the dragon and gargoyle statues. 

Even without bringing in the story of the first gargoyle being a dragon - which you can't just set aside, either - the gargoyles Martin shows us in Bran's dream - the one time they actually woke from stone - they have eyes of red fire. So don't use the D word, just call them "fiery hell beats that wakle form stone," and you still have a giant clue pointing in the direction of Martin's specific dragon lore.  I actually wrote the entire essay before I even found the story about Rouen and the dragon - I already considered it strong evidence without that story, and the story was a big fat flaming cherry on the pie. 

The gargoyles come down form the moon, too, as I pointed out. The idea that they "used to be lions" and are now twisted is a 100% match to my notion of the sun becoming a twisted and evil dark sun, and Azor Ahai representing this by transforming himself into the dark lord know as the Bloodstone Emperor. That's what his character is all about - the transforming of the sun. 

12 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

Tyrion is clearly connected to gargoyles, but what does it mean? It is interesting to realise that, while gargoyles will most likely be found all over Westeros, only gargoyles at Winterfell and Dragonstone are actually described (not King's Landing!). That seems important as well. As stated before, one of the main functions of a gargoyle is to "protect against evil". And I do think that that is connected here as well.

Yes, I clarified this above, and thank you. I definitely do not mean to imply gargoyles at KL. I do however disagree that we will see gargoyles anywhere else in Westeros. I thin martin has intentionally put them on Winterfell and Dragonstone exclusively as a clue that Winterfell was built by dragon people, or descendants of dragon people who married First Men / Women, etc.

And can we make "First Women" a term? Let's all start using it. 

12 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

Is it a hint that Tyrion, the gargoyle, is supposed to protect both the Bastard of Winterfell as well as the Princess of Dragonstone?  I'd say that it is entirely possible, and in line with several other hints surrounding Tyrion thusfar.

Yes! That's an awesome catch! Makes a damn lot of sense! The protection aspects of the gargoyle are pretty clearly evident all through Tyrion's arc. The making the cisterns run thing is one of those sly winks Martin uses to point us in the direction of his influences, love that kind of thing. 

12 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

For example, this one that you mentioned:

An interesting fact that I was unaware of.

But it is not the only thing. This quote is most likely very much well-known to you:

The eunuch rubbed his powdered hands together. “May I leave you with a bit of a riddle, Lord Tyrion?” He did not wait for an answer. “In a room sit three great men, a king, a priest, and a rich man with his gold. Between them stands a sellsword, a little man of common birth and no great mind. Each of the great ones bids him slay the other two. ‘Do it’ says the king, ‘for I am your lawful ruler.’ ‘Do it’ says the priest, ‘for I command you in the names of the gods.’ ‘Do it’ says the rich man, ‘and all this gold shall be yours.’ So tell me-who lives and who dies?”

[...]

Varys smiled. “Here, then. Power resides where men believe it resides. No more and no less.”
“So power is a mummer’s trick?”
“A shadow on the wall,” Varys murmured, “yet shadows can kill. And ofttimes a very small man can cast a very large shadow.”

That Tyrion can cast a large shadow, we know:

When he opened the door, the light from within threw his shadow clear across the yard, and for just a moment Tyrion Lannister stood tall as a king.

 

So, is Tyrion the riddle?

So, power is a riddle, and power is a shadow, and Tyrion is a shadow, so by the transitive property of symbolism... Tyrion is the riddle? This would seem like a stretch except that the sphinx is the riddle, and Tyrion is a sphinx. Sure, I can see that. But here's the thing - the riddle of the sphinx Aemon is speaking of seems like a reference to the riddle of the three heads of the dragon. The Valyrian sphinxes show dragons with human heads, indicating a person in control of the dragon bond, perhaps. What this is all about is how to ride a dragon, or how to bond with a dragon, imo. That is the riddle, and Tyrion is a nice expression of this riddle if he has Targaryen blood which will allow him to ride a dragon. If he doesn't have anything to do with riding dragons, then what could the riddle Aemon speaks of be referring to? We get that other wrote from Tyrion about sphinxes riddling with dragons, so I we are probably meant to consider the riddle of the sphinx with dragons in mind, I would think. 

The secret of what "the blood of the dragon" really means, and how dragons are woken and bonded with, has been intentionally obscured. This is a big mystery, and one worthy of the "riddle of the sphinx" idea we are talking about. Tell me - what do you think it means if Tyrion is not a Targ and the riddle doesn't have to do with dragon riding?

12 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

If so, it links Tyrion to the sphinx, as mentioned by @Elisabetta Duò in the AJT thread, who additionally mentions that sphinxes too are guardians. It would make Tyrion a guardian and a protector, and I'd say that this might be a role he will play amongst the dragons he will find himself surrounded with.

“Dragons,” Moqorro said in the Common Tongue of Westeros. He spoke it very well, with hardly a trace of accent. No doubt that was one reason the high priest Benerro had chosen him to bring the faith of R’hllor to Daenerys Targaryen. “Dragons old and young, true and false, bright and dark. And you. A small man with a big shadow, snarling in the midst of all.”

You say

I agree on the last sentence.. Tyrion's future will involve the dancing "dragons", or, Targaryens. Waring dragons, most likely. But I disagree that the quote makes him sound like a dragon himself.

It's definitely ambiguous. That's why I only spent a paragraph on it, and didn't really use it to draw any conclusions. 

12 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

In fact, Moqorro specifies dragons, "and you. A small man with a big shadow, [...]". Why specifically identify Tyrion as a small man, when speaking of dragons, if Tyrion is supposed to be one of those dragons as well? If Tyrion was supposed to be one of those dragons, why not keep the language vague (i.e. leave out "man")? E.g. "And you, small but with a big shadow, snarling in the midst of all."

Similarly to the "gargoyles and stone dragons"... If the stone dragons are gargoyles, why identify them as something completely separate? 

I just don't agree with the logic here, it seems a very narrow reading of the text to me. Gargoyles and stone dragons mentioned together because they have the same nature. That's what Martin does, over and over - mention several things side by side which are really different descriptions of the same thing. As I pointed out above, the gargoyles and dragons have the same nature and do the same things. Moquorro first answers that he sees "dragons." Then two lines of inner monologue narrative, then again "Dragons. Dragons old and young, etc., and you. A small man with a big shadow, snarling in the midst of all." "And you, small with a big shadow" sounds weird, wording-wise. I think this quote, if anything, is meant to be ambiguous, not obvious. He isn't trying to make it obvious. It's supposed to be a clever second meaning, if it's anything. Tyrion asks "what do you see in the fires?" And Moquorro says "dragons." Then he lists a bunch of dragons, and adds Tyrion to the mix, right in the middle, playing some kind of key role. Again, it's not conclusive by any means, but it's one of those things that just makes more sense if he is a dragon too. 

12 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

Again, in this quote we see Tyrion's association again with the big shadow, and thus, the association with "power resides where men believe it resides".

There are a lot of big shadows - Jon casts one against the Wall too. I would argue this big shadow is the legacy of Azor Ahai. It's the big "shadowsword" that is Lightbringer.  Nobody casts a bigger shadow than Drogon, after all. The three heads of the dragon are your shadow-casters. Stannis creating a shadowspawn with fire moon symbol Melisandre is an echo of this truth - Azor Ahai makes shadow children. The three heads of the dragon are, in my mind, three incarnations of "Azor Ahai reborn" in the extremely loose sense that Martin is using it (i.e. not actual reincarnation). 

12 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

As to the cyvasse-symbolism.. I've research that quite extensively, a year and a half ago, and even wrote an essay about it (A Game of Thrones, A Game of Cyvasse). Perhaps some part of it would benefit from a bit of rewriting, but the essence is still there. The important part of it that I'd like to adress, is in response to this (in a spoiler tag, as it adresses a slight Winds spoiler):

  Reveal hidden contents

The white cyvasse dragon ended up at Tyrion’s feet. He scooped it off the carpet and wiped it on his sleeve, but some of the Yunkish blood had collected in the fine grooves of the carving, so the pale wood seemed veined with red. “All hail our beloved queen, Daenerys.” Be she alive or be she dead. He tossed the bloody dragon in the air, caught it, grinned. “We have always been the queen’s men,” announced Brown Ben Plumm. “Rejoining the Yunkai’i was just a ploy.”

“And what a clever ploy it was.” Tyrion gave the dead man a shove with his boot. “If that breastplate fits, I want it.”  

Viserion, the white dragon, has just been flying above the battle scene and eating corpses as they are flung into the air by the catapults – so I think there can be little doubt that this bloody white dragon which Tyrion claims is a reference to Viserion, if it’s a reference to anything.  There’s also a link drawn to weirwood, pale wood veined with red – and of course, this makes be think of Bloodraven, who’s sigil is a white dragon, and who is transforming into a weirwood.  There’s a whole mysterious connection between white dragons and weirwood – you’ll notice this coloring matches Ghost’s as well – and that we will have to save for another day.

But the chess analogy here is quite clear: Tyrion deploys the chess pieces just as Tywin deploys his army.  Tywin’s army is a black iron rose, and Tyrion’s is a bloody white dragon.  This connection was reinforced with a line earlier, which was Tyrion saying “This is just a cyvasse game to the Wise Masters. We’re the pieces.  They have that in common with my lord father, these slavers.”  We are the pieces, he says, and the pieces are a bloody white dragon.  Tyrion is a bloody white dragon, in other words, and perhaps he will ride one too, deploying it like a chess piece to protect his dragon queen.  Tyrion tosses the dragon into the air – that’s where you ride them, after all – and says ‘all hail queen Daenerys.’

Last but not least, Tyrion wants the armor of the dead sun figure, the one with all those depraved scenes, despite the fact that it might have blood and black oil on it.  Tyrion has always wanted that magic armor from Valyria, right?  As a monkey demon following in the tradition of Sun Wukong, he needs a suit of magic armor.  Earlier, Tyrion remarks that he’d be like Tywin, if only he had that splendid armor.  Well, he’s getting the armor of the sun, but it’s the armor of a dead sun – the dead solar king we know as the black dragon, Azor Ahai reborn.

Attentive listeners will remember that we quoted a scene earlier where Tyrion plays cyvasse with Young Griff, a.k.a. probably fAegon Blackfyre, and Tyrion was noted to move the black dragon around the board instead of the white in this scene.  Like chess, cyvasse has a black and a white “wooden army,” as they are called, and it’s interesting to compare Tyrion’s role as dragon advisor in the two scenes.  When he had the black dragon, the yin side if you will, he was deceiving Young Griff, both on the game board and his strategic advice and manipulation.  In this scene here with the white dragon, it certainly appears that Tyrion genuinely is on team Daenerys.  This recalls Sun Wukong’s nature as a trickster god who can push the balance in either direction.
 

I do doubt the bolded part.

As I explain in my essay, what can be clearly seen, is that, when the colors of a characters cyvasse pieces are described (that is not always the case), we see the use of white and black. This can be seen four times:

• Not an actual game, but highly symbolic nonetheless, is Doran Martell's discussion with his daughter Arianne in The Princess in the Tower. Doran sits on the side of the black pieces, Arianne on the side of the white. Doran "wins".
• Tyrion Lannister vs Aegon Targaryen: Tyrion uses onyx, Aegon uses alabaster. Tyrion wins.
• Qavo Nogarys vs “the big man”: Qavo uses onyx pieces, his opponent uses alabaster pieces. Qavo wins.
• Qavo Nogarys vs Tyrion Lannister: Qavo uses onyx pieces, Tyrion uses alabaster. Qavo wins.

 

What can be seen in each of these cases is that the character who associates with the black pieces, is associated with a "win". Consider this: Doran Martell calls his daughter out of captivity with as his goal to get her to help him convince Myrcella Baratheon to lie to Ser Balon Swann. Meanwhile, Arianne's goal is to learn who has betrayed her plot. Doran, sitting on the side of the black cyvasse pieces, "wins", by being able to convince Arianne to instruct Myrcella to lie. Meanwhile, Arianne, sitting on the side of the white cyvasse pieces, "loses", as in "does not achieve her original goal" by not learning who has betrayed her.

Tyrion, in his "battle" against Aegon, attempts to convince Aegon to abandon his quest for Daenerys. He achieves this goal, playing with the black pieces, by indeed convincing the prince to do so (as he learns a few chapters later).

When Qavo and Tyrion "face" each other, Qavo "defeats" Tyrion and Haldon (while using the onyx pieces) by informing them that Daenerys is not traveling west, as they had been hoping, and instead informs them that Daenerys's enemies are gathering to fight against her.

The conclusion I draw from this, is that being associated with the black cyvasse pieces indicates a "win", both in the 'actual cyvasse game', as in the underlying message. 

Which brings me back to the spoiler-tag needed passage:

  Reveal hidden contents

The cyvasse game in Tyrion II is just standing there in the tent. No one is playing with it, no one is even near it, no one is associated with it. Until the Yunkish messenger walks in. When he is killed, he is the one who falls against the cyvasse game, smearing his blood all over the white dragon (the most powerful piece in the game). And that is the one that Tyrion eventually picks up.

 

I'd say that, in accordance with what I've written above, the white cyvasse dragon in Plumm's tent symblizes the loss of the Yunkish (a bloody loss), symbolized by the blood smeared across the white cyvasse dragon. As the dragon is the "most powerful piece", I'd even suggest that this loss is due to the Yunkish losign theri most powerful "piece". As I suggest in my essay, it is possibly connected to the sellswords. The sellswords are ordered to guard the trebuchets. And what do we see? It is not only the Second Sons who switch sides, betraying the Yunkish, but also the Windblown.  From an earlier Tyrion chapter:

Tyrion almost grabbed his dragon but thought better of it. Last game he had brought her out too soon and lost her to a trebuchet.

This quote shows that Tyrion has learned from the mistakes he made previously while playing "the game". Is this what we will witness during the Battle for Meereen? Tyrion played a role in the Second Sons switching sides. He attempted to convince Plumm, and Plumm eventually decided to do so after learning the Windblown had switched sides as well. So, perhaps the fact that Tyrion is the one to pick up the white dragon associates him with the future loss of the trebuchets of Yunkai.

 

Wow, that's really interesting analysis! Black dragons for the win, yeah! The trebuchet catch is cool too.

But none of that is at odds with the more clear and obvious foreshadowing of Tyrion claiming a white dragon moments after the white dragon was flying overhead. I mean... you can't deny that. I am pretty used to seeing Martin foreshadow or reference more than one idea at the same time in the same passage, so I don't really bat an eyelash at the idea of both of these ideas co-existing, although I understand why other people might think so. I'm not so sure about the idea that the foreshadowing is of Tyrion having to do with future trebuchet loss. I just don't see George having Tyrion pick a white dragon piece in order to foreshadow the destruction of a measly trebuchet.  The white dragon is a hugely powerful symbol, and I don't think George uses ideas like that to talk about minor events in the battle. If he brings out the white dragon, I have to conclude we are talking about something far more important. 

Now, building on your research, riding the white dragon might not be such a great experience, aye? I wouldn't want him to face off against the black dragon, certainly. That would be way too awful and a sure loss for Tyrion. 

Do you see any relevance for your cyvasse analysis in regards to Bloodraven, another white dragon? 

 

[Lady Fishbiscuit]

3 hours ago, LmL said:

Woo! Happy to oblige. Although I will say if you don't listen to the podcast version of this, you're missing out on the amazing voice acting of my friend Paige, who does an amazing Tyrion and a haunting Maester-Aemon-on-his-deathbed.

...

Just to clarify, and @Rhaenys_Targaryen mentioned this too, King's Landing doesn't have gargoyles. I was merely pouting out that the penultimate gargoyle / monkey demon Tyrion scene comes with him perched on the walls of King's Landing like a gargoyle. He perched on WF, and Cersei made the remark comparing him to the gargoyles on WF, so George has drawn a link between these three places in that context, but I am not suggesting KL has gargoyles - it doesn't. 

I get too distracted when listening to the podcast. Maybe I need to listen in a darkened room! I am planning on listening (for the dramatic effect) as I really enjoyed the waves of night & moon blood podcast. I just wanted to read first to absorb the detail.

You're right on the KL gargoyles (or lack thereof), of course.  I mixed up Tyrion as a gargoyle symbol with actual stone gargoyles.

I hope you don't get disheartened by lower than usual response on this. The forums are currently quite choked with what ifs, who should marry who, who could kick who's ass, etc. that some folks may be spending less time on there just now.  I've even started reading the TV forums, which I never did until this season.  Also, it's been school half term break in the UK this week so a lot of people are away.  

[LmL]

9 hours ago, Lady Fishbiscuit said:

I get too distracted when listening to the podcast. Maybe I need to listen in a darkened room! I am planning on listening (for the dramatic effect) as I really enjoyed the waves of night & moon blood podcast. I just wanted to read first to absorb the detail.

Right on! The idea behind making the text and podcast match is that you can intake the material in whatever form suits your personal taste. I realize I'm going pretty deep and doing very close analysis, and that I am asking a lot of people to try to hold their attention for such a long period of time, so I do my best to make it as accessible and entertaining as possible. I'm also trying to become better at reading / narrating so as to not lull people to sleep. You have to avoid repetitive sentence structure and inflection... it's kind of s subtle thing which I am trying to become good at. When I listen back to my pods, I hear moments when I am doing it right and other times when it sounds too much like I am reading, but I think I am getting better. You have to become competent at the basic elements of reading and vocal acting before they become instinctual, and at that point you can focus more on emotion and the finer points of delivery. It's been a lot of fun so far!

9 hours ago, Lady Fishbiscuit said:

You're right on the KL gargoyles (or lack thereof), of course.  I mixed up Tyrion as a gargoyle symbol with actual stone gargoyles.

Yep yep, just wanted to make sure I didn't throw anyone off. I sometimes switch between speaking literally and metaphorically without making the distinction clear.

9 hours ago, Lady Fishbiscuit said:

I hope you don't get disheartened by lower than usual response on this. The forums are currently quite choked with what ifs, who should marry who, who could kick who's ass, etc. that some folks may be spending less time on there just now.  I've even started reading the TV forums, which I never did until this season.  Also, it's been school half term break in the UK this week so a lot of people are away.  

No, not disheartened at all - the podcast is actually really starting to take off, as is my web traffic. It was more of a playful jab at everyone, like "damn, I thought I was throwing you guys some red meat!" I was trying to make this podcast so that people who haven't read all of my stuff could still enjoy, as long as they have a very basic idea of my moon disaster theory. I was trying to discuss things that weren't completely enmeshed with the structure of my theory, because I figured a lot of people would want to read something about Tyrion Targaryen who haven't necessarily read all of my stuff. But it's also true that because my writings and podcasts tend to run on the long side, it does take a minute for people to have time to get through it. It's all good though, and I appreciate your sentiments.  And you're right that the show sucks up all the air, no doubt - and that's another reason I decided to cover this topic now, because it might be relevant to where the show is. I wanted to put out everything I had before any reveals came along, and I figured since it was relevant to the show, it might not get buried. Maybe she's just a slow-starter, we'll see!

[White Ravens]

On 6/3/2016 at 8:25 AM, LmL said:

Well, I have to say, I'm rather disappointed in the response to this one. I figured an essay called "Tyrion Targaryen" would draw some attention. I have 31 people following me, did any of you get some kind of notification when I posted this theory? I thought that's what is supposed to happen when people follow each other. I follow people, and have never got a notification when they post something new. O great and powerful @Ran, am I misunderstanding what the deal is with the following? If people who have chosen to follow you aren't notified when you post a theory, what is the point of this feature? Ostensibly, people choose to follow someone because they want to know when that person posts something new - that's certainly my wish when I follow people. I was excited when I saw that the new board had this feature, but it doesn't seem to be working.  

I can't speak for everyone, of course, but there might be a bit of a burnout situation going on here.  Your essays are very long.  Like, novella long.  20,000 words long.  Dunk and Egg Mystery Night long.  You write theories that rival source material for longevity long.  I'm a crusty old fifty-three year old fanboy of the GRRM and I'll read any primary material that he writes, but you must remember that you are writing seconday material and posting theories based upon GRRM's primary material.  It amounts to a busload of conjecture and not everyone is going to find it worth their while to read every long theory that you float on this forum.  I read most of your early stuff but now I just skim your material and read threads like this one to gauge whether or not I need to invest the time necessary to read your latest novella.  I respect the amount of time and energy you put into your theories but it's not like they are required reading or anything.  Just saying. 

 

Offered with respect.

[LmL]

2 hours ago, White Ravens said:

I can't speak for everyone, of course, but there might be a bit of a burnout situation going on here.  Your essays are very long.  Like, novella long.  20,000 words long.  Dunk and Egg Mystery Night long.  You write theories that rival source material for longevity long.  I'm a crusty old fifty-three year old fanboy of the GRRM and I'll read any primary material that he writes, but you must remember that you are writing seconday material and posting theories based upon GRRM's primary material.  It amounts to a busload of conjecture and not everyone is going to find it worth their while to read every long theory that you float on this forum.  I read most of your early stuff but now I just skim your material and read threads like this one to gauge whether or not I need to invest the time necessary to read your latest novella.  I respect the amount of time and energy you put into your theories but it's not like they are required reading or anything.  Just saying. 

 

Offered with respect.

No I get it, it's not for everyone. Still, I don't think the follow feature is working. 

 

ETA: @White Ravens, as to the length, I guess I always figure that by breaking everything into many smaller sections, it was basically like giving you a series of podcasts / essays all at once. I figured that people would just listen or read in chunks, based on whether or not things held their interest. Do you think I would deb better off breaking things up in small bits? It's that I set out to write very long essays, it's just that Martin's symbolic themes run through so many scenes, and the only way to really show that a set of symbols appearing together in a specific way is not coincidence is to show repeated examples of the same symbols or types of character doing the same types of things. Honestly it's quite a challenge, and I think a lot about what is the best way and format to present the ideas. For the most part, what I enjoy is doing close readings of the text and analyzing scenes in detail, It's hard to do that quickly and have it make any sense. 

Honestly I welcome any advice or feedback you might have. I'm always trying to get better. 

[Equilibrium]

Damn it man, are you part of conspiracy to keep me from working?

I will of course read it when I get time, I said I read very fast but your essays usually take three times more thinking time then reading time.

Just so you know I avoided ALL spoilers so far even though I am on the internet as much as anyone should be and few of my friends, my girlfriend and my own father watch the show, so you can't say it's impossible or even hard to stay away from spoilers. I just wanted you to know what kind of sacrifice you are making me do with you mild spoiler essay

 

[Durran Durrandon]

Hey there. I liked this one quite a bit. It felt like a very fresh analysis, a different look at a character you haven't written that much about, new background mythology, really ew connections all of over the place. Well, played, ser.

[LmL]

2 hours ago, Durran Durrandon said:

Hey there. I liked this one quite a bit. It felt like a very fresh analysis, a different look at a character you haven't written that much about, new background mythology, really ew connections all of over the place. Well, played, ser.

Thanks Durran, that means a lot. This is exactly what I was trying to do, because I am aware of what @White Ravens was talking about. I am experimenting with format to try to keep things fresh and make my ideas as access able as possible. I'm really glad it seemed fresh to you - maybe you can convince White Ravens to give it a whirl

I have a feeling character based essays are always going to be the most popular - it's a character driven story and that's what people respond to. Now that I have laid out the basics of my theory, I'm in a better position to do character focused essays. That's actually why I made the remark above about being surprised at the somewhat slow response on this essay - I wasn't complaining, but just kind of scratching my head and saying "huh I thought a Tyrion essay would draw a lot of eyes." It actually has, overall - I've had a lot of downloads so far. It's just the discussion here that was lagging a bit. But it's true that with longer stuff it might take people a while to get around to listening. Mostly I was remarking on the seemingly ineffective "follow" mechanism.

I'm excited to see what they do with the new Journey to the West film they are working on. Looks like they are going to put a lot of resources into it - hopefully it's entertaining. The  people will get into the whole Sun Wukong thing and I will be ahead of the curve talking about Tyrion being influenced by Sun Wukong. I'm guessing George may have been aware of his myth trough the old TV show, but he's quite the student of mythology also. Either way, I think it's really cool that he's using more than just the well known and well-trodden areas of myth, like Norse and Greek myth

 

[Guest]

 

Quite opposite from your approach is Preston Jacobs, who pretty nailed Swreetrobin and presented other very interesting ideas and aspects of the story as well. He's exclusively related to other Martin's works if he's trying to make fantasy parallels. 

 

 

[Elisabetta Duò]

On 04 giugno 2016 at 9:21 PM, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

I do doubt the bolded part.

I tend to think the bolded part might be correct instead, but for different reasons than the person who wrote that. I guess I've said like everywhere (soz) that I do see a connection between Tyrion and Viserion (the white dragon) and that I see this connection not only because Viserion is partly gold and because he's the only dragon

Spoiler

Tyrion sees during the Mereen siege in TWOW

but especially because imo Viserion is meant to be instrumental to the Lannisters' downfall (1. The cream-colored dragon sunk sharp black claws into the lion's mane, 2. named after Daenery's cruel and revengeful brother Viserys, 3. has a roar that would send a hundred lions running)  => Viserion = Tyrion's instrument of revenge against Cersei (and Jamie?).

Hence, to me,

Spoiler

Tyrion picking up a bloodied white dragon is foreshadowing of Tyrion's bloody revenge - or chance of revenge - against the Lannisters who wronged him through Viserion.

Ironically, it was Tywin Lannister who organized the tourney to celebrate Visery's birth. On a more silly and naive note, Viserion is white and gold and the white cyrasse wooded dragon is (now) white and red, so we have the lannisters colors (red and gold) linked to a white dragon. I wish Tyrion stopped before his revengeful thoughts ended up in fire and blood...but Tyrion is not the 'classical, sterotypical hero' so I wouldn't know if GRRM had this heroic thing in store for him (not that I'd truly care, Tyrion would be my fave even if he roasted Cersei). 

I have to add that I still have to read the essay below, so I'm not saying the symbolism @Rhaenys_Targaryen found and suggested doesn't apply

Spoiler

(Tyrion picking up the white dragon might have more than just one meaning at the same time) but thw connection with Viserion and Tyrion's thoughts / chaces of revenge what I thought when he picked up the white dragon. 

On 04 giugno 2016 at 9:21 PM, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

As to the cyvasse-symbolism.. I've research that quite extensively, a year and a half ago, and even wrote an essay about it (A Game of Thrones, A Game of Cyvasse).

I did notice the black pieces => win connection and I find it interesting, I'm interested in learning more so I will read this (as soon as I can).

[LmL]

26 minutes ago, wolfinho said:

 

Quite opposite from your approach is Preston Jacobs, who pretty nailed Swreetrobin and presented other very interesting ideas and aspects of the story as well. He's exclusively related to other Martin's works if he's trying to make fantasy parallels. 

 

 

Preston's analysis of Martin's other works is what I like best about him. His theories about Sweetrobin haven't been anything close to confirmed, however. And of course George has repeatedly said that ASOIAF is not sci-fi and nota part of his thousand world, so it's a bit strange that Preston continues to insist this is the case. 

He also breaks up all his theories into 15-20 minute chunks, which is a very different approach. That's an idea I have been playing with, chopping up my larger works into smaller bits.  

[Elisabetta Duò]

On 05 giugno 2016 at 5:44 AM, LmL said:

The old "but it ruins his relationship with Tywin!" argument pops up a lot, and I don't blame people for making it, but I think you just have to think about it a little harder and you'll see very clearly what we are talking about - it's all about who raised you

Ehrn (*raises her hand feeling 'guilty'*). Jokes aside, I can speak only for myself of course, but I never meant to imply that it would ruin their relationship under this aspect/perspective. I totally agree that every one of us is the child of the parents who raised him and Tywin and his actions as a father 'shaped' Tyrion for good and for worse. But I think their relationship is way more deep, intense and dramatic if Tyrion is Tywin's son in name, in blood and in skills, if they both were trapped in a relationship they didn't want but it was 100% bonding.

I feel like if Tywin weren't Tyrion's father, then:

1. yeah he killed him but technically it wasn't kinslaying (easy way out);

2. Tywin didn't want him as his son, never treated him as such and guess what, in the end he wasn't (that would be cheesy imo.. most of us had a lovely childhood but some fathers do treat their own sons like s*** at times, sadly… and the childs can dream someone else is their true father, but it's not);

3. Tyrion felt like he was an outcast all his life and if he's not Tywin's son, it fits the stereotype of the adpted child who doesn't fit in the family and wasn't truly meant to a member of that family because his true parents are others (too easy: as I was saying, unlucky kids do feel alone and like outcasts in their own family and they dream that a child exchange happened and one day they'll find out who their true parents are, because everyone would be better...but these are excape dreams for sad childs, the crude reality is that the parents who don't love them are truly their parents);

4. Cersei hated him and Jamie betrayed him about Tysha but they were his half-brothers after all, if even the - at times boringly - 'honorable' Starks didn't treat half brothers as equals (Catelyn Tully treated a poor blamless child like sh** only because she thought he was Ned's bastard and Sansa and Robb often didn't traeat him decently as well), it's only expected that the 'evil' Lannisters are justifyed to treat Trion like shit;

5. Tyrion will seek revenge against his enemies, but they won't be 100% his own blood, especially in a world where generally speaking, who your father is counts more than who your mother is.

Slightly out of topic, I've also watched a short interview where Charles Dance was asked by a A+J=T fan if Tywin saying things like you're not my son, I cannot prove you're not mine, etc. were a proof /clue that Tyrion is not his son in his opinion or if Tywin genuinely thought that and he said that by his point of view, it's just because a man like Tywin wouldn't accept a dwarf as his son in a society where the pyramid was man > woman > dwarf. The girl was quite supponent because she wasn't pleased with the answer so she started to tell him that the proof about Tyrion being a Targis  overwhelming and such and he was like taken aback and told her something like 'you're much more informed than I am' (clearly meaning a. I'm not familiar with theories and anyway I'm on the skeptical side b. I want this question&answer to end and go ahead with the next question) and she arrogantly answered back 'I guess so because I have an exam about it (or it was her thesis, I don't remember)'. I think he handled it like a man his age and a gentleman, he didn't reply further (if I got the same answer, I would answer her back 'easy, child' at the very least) but I think he thought poorly of her (I wouldn't blame him for it, not even if A+J=T turns out to be true... I had my degree almost 11 yrs ago and I would have never acted like that if I had gotten the chance to ask a question about the subject of my thesis to somebody like him and 3-times my age, regardless of the answer and my opinion about it). Anyway, I think she made a true disservice to the theory.

The only things I would find bitterly-interesting if A+J=T proved to be true are: Tywin died without knowing it for sure; Tyrion is the only child with the Ty-prefix and he's not a Lannister; Tyrion had wanted Tywin's approval all his life and Tywin wasn't even his father. I still think Ty-rion is Ty-win's son not only in the skills but in blood also and maybe even the one meant to inherit CRock IF he survives (unless he refuses it), but in case I'm wrong, these above listed details would be the best part of the A+J=T theory when it comes to the Tyrion-Tywin dynamic or at least the ones I would find more interesting. 

 

 

[Ser Creighton]

On 6/4/2016 at 2:21 PM, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

@LmL,

Thank you for tagging me! And sorry it took a while (again) to respond, but I have been rather busy, and wanted to take the time to write a good reply.

 

That Tyrion is associated with gargoyles cannot be denied. He's called a gargoyle too many times for it to be a coincidence, he fits the two main functions of a gargoyle (guiding the water, as he did in Casterly Rock at the age of 16, and protecting against evil, as he does on multiple occasions, e.g. Battle of the Blackwater), and he is associated with the "bringing luck" as gargoyles do:

Out front squatted a waist-high gargoyle, so eroded by rain and salt that his features were all but obliterated. He and Davos were old friends, though. He gave a pat to the stone head as he went in. "Luck," he murmured. (A Clash of Kings, Davos I)

 

One of the tigers spied the dwarf and said something that made the others laugh. As they reached the gate, he pulled off his clawed gauntlet and the sweaty glove beneath, locked one arm around the dwarf's neck, and roughly rubbed his head. Tyrion was too startled to resist. It was all over in a heartbeat. "Was there some reason for that?" he demanded of the Halfmaester.

"He says that it is good luck to rub the head of a dwarf," Haldon said after an exchange with the guard in his own tongue. (A Dance with Dragons, Tyrion VI)

It is too clear to be a coincidence, that is certain. That leaves us with the question of what it means.

You immediately connect gargoyles with dagons, based on history of gargoyles, but why not look at the gargoyles described in ASOIAF? Those are the ones that GRRM wants his readers to see, after all. 

The gargoyles specifically described in ASOIAF are "they might once have been lions", wyverns, hellhounds, griffins, demons, manticores, minotaurs, basilisks, cockatrices, and "a thousand queerer creatures". I might have missed a reference, but I did not see a dragon gargoyle mentioned in the text, appearing anywhere. In fact, Dragonstone, the place with the highest density of gargoyles we've seen thus far, appears to be made up of buildings in the shape of dragons, and next to that the aforementioned gargoyles:

The child had been plagued by nightmares as far back as Maester Cressen could recall. "We have talked of this before," he said gently. "The dragons cannot come to life. They are carved of stone, child. In olden days, our island was the westernmost outpost of the great Freehold of Valyria. It was the Valyrians who raised this citadel, and they had ways of shaping stone since lost to us. A castle must have towers wherever two walls meet at an angle, for defense. The Valyrians fashioned these towers in the shape of dragons to make their fortress seem more fearsome, just as they crowned their walls with a thousand gargoyles instead of simple crenellations." He took her small pink hand in his own frail spotted one and gave it a gentle squeeze. "So you see, there is nothing to fear."

The towers are shaped as dragons, but the gargoyles..? Cressen does not identify them (and who can blame him? There are a thousand to be found!) Davos later does identify them for us, however:

He raised his eyes to gaze up at the walls. In place of merlons, a thousand grotesques and gargoyles looked down on him, each different from all the others; wyverns, griffins, demons, manticores, minotaurs, basilisks, hellhounds, cockatrices, and a thousand queerer creatures sprouted from the castle's battlements as if they'd grown there. And the dragons were everywhere. The Great Hall was a dragon lying on its belly. Men entered through its open mouth. The kitchens were a dragon curled up in a ball, with the smoke and steam of the ovens vented through its nostrils. The towers were dragons hunched above the walls or poised for flight; the Windwyrm seemed to scream defiance, while Sea Dragon Tower gazed serenely out across the waves. Smaller dragons framed the gates. Dragon claws emerged from walls to grasp at torches, great stone wings enfolded the smith and armory, and tails formed arches, bridges, and exterior stairs.

I think that especially the Davos chapters suggest that there are no dragon-gargoyles, but only dragon-statues to be found on Dragonstone (as well as buildings and towers shaped like dragons, as described above).

Heat rose shimmering through the chill air; behind, the gargoyles and stone dragons on the castle walls seemed blurred, as if Davos were seeing them through a veil of tears.

"Gargoyles and stone dragons". The fact that Davos sees the need to distinguish, I take it that the stone dragons here are not gargoyles, but statues, just as the "smaller dragons" mentioned in the quote above, framing the gate.

 

Tyrion is clearly connected to gargoyles, but what does it mean? It is interesting to realise that, while gargoyles will most likely be found all over Westeros, only gargoyles at Winterfell and Dragonstone are actually described (not King's Landing!). That seems important as well. As stated before, one of the main functions of a gargoyle is to "protect against evil". And I do think that that is connected here as well.

Is it a hint that Tyrion, the gargoyle, is supposed to protect both the Bastard of Winterfell as well as the Princess of Dragonstone?  I'd say that it is entirely possible, and in line with several other hints surrounding Tyrion thusfar.

For example, this one that you mentioned:

An interesting fact that I was unaware of.

But it is not the only thing. This quote is most likely very much well-known to you:

The eunuch rubbed his powdered hands together. “May I leave you with a bit of a riddle, Lord Tyrion?” He did not wait for an answer. “In a room sit three great men, a king, a priest, and a rich man with his gold. Between them stands a sellsword, a little man of common birth and no great mind. Each of the great ones bids him slay the other two. ‘Do it’ says the king, ‘for I am your lawful ruler.’ ‘Do it’ says the priest, ‘for I command you in the names of the gods.’ ‘Do it’ says the rich man, ‘and all this gold shall be yours.’ So tell me-who lives and who dies?”

[...]

Varys smiled. “Here, then. Power resides where men believe it resides. No more and no less.”
“So power is a mummer’s trick?”
“A shadow on the wall,” Varys murmured, “yet shadows can kill. And ofttimes a very small man can cast a very large shadow.”

That Tyrion can cast a large shadow, we know:

When he opened the door, the light from within threw his shadow clear across the yard, and for just a moment Tyrion Lannister stood tall as a king.

 

So, is Tyrion the riddle? If so, it links Tyrion to the sphinx, as mentioned by @Elisabetta Duò in the AJT thread, who additionally mentions that sphinxes too are guardians. It would make Tyrion a guardian and a protector, and I'd say that this might be a role he will play amongst the dragons he will find himself surrounded with.

“Dragons,” Moqorro said in the Common Tongue of Westeros. He spoke it very well, with hardly a trace of accent. No doubt that was one reason the high priest Benerro had chosen him to bring the faith of R’hllor to Daenerys Targaryen. “Dragons old and young, true and false, bright and dark. And you. A small man with a big shadow, snarling in the midst of all.”

You say

I agree on the last sentence.. Tyrion's future will involve the dancing "dragons", or, Targaryens. Waring dragons, most likely. But I disagree that the quote makes him sound like a dragon himself. In fact, Moqorro specifies dragons, "and you. A small man with a big shadow, [...]". Why specifically identify Tyrion as a small man, when speaking of dragons, if Tyrion is supposed to be one of those dragons as well? If Tyrion was supposed to be one of those dragons, why not keep the language vague (i.e. leave out "man")? E.g. "And you, small but with a big shadow, snarling in the midst of all."

Similarly to the "gargoyles and stone dragons"... If the stone dragons are gargoyles, why identify them as something completely separate? 

Again, in this quote we see Tyrion's association again with the big shadow, and thus, the association with "power resides where men believe it resides".

 

As to the cyvasse-symbolism.. I've research that quite extensively, a year and a half ago, and even wrote an essay about it (A Game of Thrones, A Game of Cyvasse). Perhaps some part of it would benefit from a bit of rewriting, but the essence is still there. The important part of it that I'd like to adress, is in response to this (in a spoiler tag, as it adresses a slight Winds spoiler):

  Reveal hidden contents

The white cyvasse dragon ended up at Tyrion’s feet. He scooped it off the carpet and wiped it on his sleeve, but some of the Yunkish blood had collected in the fine grooves of the carving, so the pale wood seemed veined with red. “All hail our beloved queen, Daenerys.” Be she alive or be she dead. He tossed the bloody dragon in the air, caught it, grinned. “We have always been the queen’s men,” announced Brown Ben Plumm. “Rejoining the Yunkai’i was just a ploy.”

“And what a clever ploy it was.” Tyrion gave the dead man a shove with his boot. “If that breastplate fits, I want it.”  

Viserion, the white dragon, has just been flying above the battle scene and eating corpses as they are flung into the air by the catapults – so I think there can be little doubt that this bloody white dragon which Tyrion claims is a reference to Viserion, if it’s a reference to anything.  There’s also a link drawn to weirwood, pale wood veined with red – and of course, this makes be think of Bloodraven, who’s sigil is a white dragon, and who is transforming into a weirwood.  There’s a whole mysterious connection between white dragons and weirwood – you’ll notice this coloring matches Ghost’s as well – and that we will have to save for another day.

But the chess analogy here is quite clear: Tyrion deploys the chess pieces just as Tywin deploys his army.  Tywin’s army is a black iron rose, and Tyrion’s is a bloody white dragon.  This connection was reinforced with a line earlier, which was Tyrion saying “This is just a cyvasse game to the Wise Masters. We’re the pieces.  They have that in common with my lord father, these slavers.”  We are the pieces, he says, and the pieces are a bloody white dragon.  Tyrion is a bloody white dragon, in other words, and perhaps he will ride one too, deploying it like a chess piece to protect his dragon queen.  Tyrion tosses the dragon into the air – that’s where you ride them, after all – and says ‘all hail queen Daenerys.’

Last but not least, Tyrion wants the armor of the dead sun figure, the one with all those depraved scenes, despite the fact that it might have blood and black oil on it.  Tyrion has always wanted that magic armor from Valyria, right?  As a monkey demon following in the tradition of Sun Wukong, he needs a suit of magic armor.  Earlier, Tyrion remarks that he’d be like Tywin, if only he had that splendid armor.  Well, he’s getting the armor of the sun, but it’s the armor of a dead sun – the dead solar king we know as the black dragon, Azor Ahai reborn.

Attentive listeners will remember that we quoted a scene earlier where Tyrion plays cyvasse with Young Griff, a.k.a. probably fAegon Blackfyre, and Tyrion was noted to move the black dragon around the board instead of the white in this scene.  Like chess, cyvasse has a black and a white “wooden army,” as they are called, and it’s interesting to compare Tyrion’s role as dragon advisor in the two scenes.  When he had the black dragon, the yin side if you will, he was deceiving Young Griff, both on the game board and his strategic advice and manipulation.  In this scene here with the white dragon, it certainly appears that Tyrion genuinely is on team Daenerys.  This recalls Sun Wukong’s nature as a trickster god who can push the balance in either direction.
 

I do doubt the bolded part.

As I explain in my essay, what can be clearly seen, is that, when the colors of a characters cyvasse pieces are described (that is not always the case), we see the use of white and black. This can be seen four times:

• Not an actual game, but highly symbolic nonetheless, is Doran Martell's discussion with his daughter Arianne in The Princess in the Tower. Doran sits on the side of the black pieces, Arianne on the side of the white. Doran "wins".
• Tyrion Lannister vs Aegon Targaryen: Tyrion uses onyx, Aegon uses alabaster. Tyrion wins.
• Qavo Nogarys vs “the big man”: Qavo uses onyx pieces, his opponent uses alabaster pieces. Qavo wins.
• Qavo Nogarys vs Tyrion Lannister: Qavo uses onyx pieces, Tyrion uses alabaster. Qavo wins.

 

What can be seen in each of these cases is that the character who associates with the black pieces, is associated with a "win". Consider this: Doran Martell calls his daughter out of captivity with as his goal to get her to help him convince Myrcella Baratheon to lie to Ser Balon Swann. Meanwhile, Arianne's goal is to learn who has betrayed her plot. Doran, sitting on the side of the black cyvasse pieces, "wins", by being able to convince Arianne to instruct Myrcella to lie. Meanwhile, Arianne, sitting on the side of the white cyvasse pieces, "loses", as in "does not achieve her original goal" by not learning who has betrayed her.

Tyrion, in his "battle" against Aegon, attempts to convince Aegon to abandon his quest for Daenerys. He achieves this goal, playing with the black pieces, by indeed convincing the prince to do so (as he learns a few chapters later).

When Qavo and Tyrion "face" each other, Qavo "defeats" Tyrion and Haldon (while using the onyx pieces) by informing them that Daenerys is not traveling west, as they had been hoping, and instead informs them that Daenerys's enemies are gathering to fight against her.

The conclusion I draw from this, is that being associated with the black cyvasse pieces indicates a "win", both in the 'actual cyvasse game', as in the underlying message. 

Which brings me back to the spoiler-tag needed passage:

  Hide contents

The cyvasse game in Tyrion II is just standing there in the tent. No one is playing with it, no one is even near it, no one is associated with it. Until the Yunkish messenger walks in. When he is killed, he is the one who falls against the cyvasse game, smearing his blood all over the white dragon (the most powerful piece in the game). And that is the one that Tyrion eventually picks up.

 

I'd say that, in accordance with what I've written above, the white cyvasse dragon in Plumm's tent symblizes the loss of the Yunkish (a bloody loss), symbolized by the blood smeared across the white cyvasse dragon. As the dragon is the "most powerful piece", I'd even suggest that this loss is due to the Yunkish losign theri most powerful "piece". As I suggest in my essay, it is possibly connected to the sellswords. The sellswords are ordered to guard the trebuchets. And what do we see? It is not only the Second Sons who switch sides, betraying the Yunkish, but also the Windblown.  From an earlier Tyrion chapter:

Tyrion almost grabbed his dragon but thought better of it. Last game he had brought her out too soon and lost her to a trebuchet.

This quote shows that Tyrion has learned from the mistakes he made previously while playing "the game". Is this what we will witness during the Battle for Meereen? Tyrion played a role in the Second Sons switching sides. He attempted to convince Plumm, and Plumm eventually decided to do so after learning the Windblown had switched sides as well. So, perhaps the fact that Tyrion is the one to pick up the white dragon associates him with the future loss of the trebuchets of Yunkai.

 

Still love your Cyvasse theory, your wrong about  Tyrion but man the Cyvasse theory was terrific. As usual most of your stuff is well researched and terrific. The Moqorro Vision and and Varys riddle is great, identical imagery, basically the same symbolism and ideas. Ties well to Tyrions encounter with the missing Sphinx on his way to Dany.

Now of course Tyrion is associated with Gargoyles, another a poster wrote a theory about it a couple years back. Tyrion fans got really upset, they thought that poster was trolling. But it ties him to guardian, and water, lions and even dragons. Much as the Valyrian sphinx does as in the books they are tied to lions and in mythology lions. Tyrian die, aka Tyrian purple or royal purple. As another poster points out, Tyrion and Viserion, seem to have a connection. Good evidence too. Imagery is subjective but is not limited to just one character. Although Tyrion being introduce above the door and pissing off the Wall seems obvious enough.

The idea that Tyrion is a secret Targ has most often had it's detractors from Secret Targ Jon fans. Or people who feel it will somehow effect his relationship with Tywin. Where very little would seem to change between the way Jon felt about Ned or Tyrion would feel about Tywin. But you never know fans got upset when they felt Cersie's motivation as a character changed when we found out about the Maggy prophecy. Yet Cersei was a sociopath well before that as she demonstrated that very day by murdering a little girl. Any reveal for Jon or Tyrion does not change who Ned or Tywin were. Both men seem to have had their share of secrets, when you find out, it does not really change the character, you just get more insight into them.

Now as you mention Cyvasse, a Cyvasse game has many pieces. Take Dany, a Queen, pretty much one of the most powerful people alive, rides a black dragon, sits on a black bench. Though she has a white lion pelt she likes to wear. One might say an Albino lion pelt. Now you have Jon,  a possible king, who has taken the black. He likes his Albino Dire Wolf. Oh dogs and cats. There is an inversion there but the parallel is similar. And of course in a game of Cyvasse you need your King and your Queen, though as Tyrion informs us, her king is missing.

Now in Cyvasse you have colors on the board aside from black and white, you have blue and red. Jon of course is associated with Blue, Ice, Snow, but perhaps he will change to red in the future. Hold the phone, someone is a the door. I'll be right back...

Okay so you have a black king and queen, and both would appear to be Targaryens, and if part of this story is the return of their house, then perhaps another Targaryen Hand would be in order. It's not like there is an actual shortage in the books, Bloodraven, perhaps Vary's, heck maybe even Aegon, perhaps a Blackfyre or two. Black and Fire (Red), good colors in a Cyvasse game. Tyrion like Jon and Dany also has black and white going on, his hair. Arya in the house of black and white, seems there are some obvious players.

On the other side you have the Others, Pale as Milk Glass. And of course Milk Glass is not all that different from Alabaster. Though he would seem to lack a queen. The Night's King that is. Though in a game of Cyvasse a piece can adopt the color of a square it is on. He would probably like that. And Dany does like Blue Roses, and of course she has had her conflict with Milk Men and Blue pieces like the Warlocks. Of course the North seems to have it's share of White things, White Knife, White Harbor, they worship white trees, though only when they are red in nature. And in Essos Black trees that are blue in nature with blue sap are not all that different from their red sapped counter parts. Though when you are on or near those squares it's best to be careful.

A white piece turned red seems no friend to the others and Black piece turned blue no friend to Dany. House Arryn Blue and white sigil marked by the moon. House Targaryen, Black and Red. Night Fort, marked by a Weirwood, The Wall marked by a weirwood grove, Bran and Blood raven, marked by a weirwood, Winterfell, marked by a weirwood. Red squares on the white side of the board. House of the Undying, blue square on the black side of the board.

Tyrion, the little Gargoyle is where he belongs. With family. Though Tyrion appears to be a black and green piece like his eyes. Though still on the black side of the board, with his Half sister, and hopefully solving who his nephew is. The black side, the return of house Targaryen. It's funny, Ned never said anything bad about Rhaegar, Arya is fascinated with Dragons, Nymeria and Dark sister, Arya is also associated with water believe it or not. Jon wishes for a dragon or three, Bran is with a Dragon, and sees a dragon, and Sansa... Well she... Ummmm... I am sure she will be fine. (Shhhhh, she's not going to be fine).

All in all a solid theory on Gargoyle Tyrion LmL, and you Rhaenys, I will convert you to the darkside. After all as you point out, it's the winning team. We are over here with Uncle Tyrion, Aunt Dany, Nephew Jon, Cousin Arya, Cousin Bran, Cousin in the wrong place Sansa. Come to us, it's better over here. We are going to win, we have Dany, Tyrion, Jon, Bran, and Arya, that's it man game over. It's a family event. Targs rule, Others drool. Come to us. You know our ally is the force too, the Jedi are always bragging, but hello we use it all the time, and it looks better on us and our powers are cooler. Come on, it will be okay, we are going to kill White White Walkers, get it "White" Walkers. Bunch bus wankers coming down out of the Hill Billy north, to mess with the Royal Family. Come on now, we got Dragons over here, we ride them, and sometimes we drop water balloons on people. It's fun.

[Elisabetta Duò]

8 minutes ago, Ser Creighton said:

Ned never said anything bad about Rhaegar, Arya is fascinated with Dragons, Nymeria and Dark sister, Arya is also associated with water believe it or not. Jon wishes for a dragon or three, Bran is with a Dragon, and sees a dragon, and Sansa... Well she... Ummmm... I am sure she will be fine.

I noticed that too. There are also gargoyles at Winterfell. Tyrion and the Starks share a 'sympahty' for dragons and if they fight on the same side, then Sansa will be fine as well (unless/until he dies at least), she's still a virgin and his wife in the books.

[LmL]

Hey @Ser Creighton great to see you, as always. And as always, very entertaining and insightful comments. I'll have to think about this one in particular:

3 hours ago, Ser Creighton said:

A white piece turned red seems no friend to the others and Black piece turned blue no friend to Dany. House Arryn Blue and white sigil marked by the moon. House Targaryen, Black and Red. Night Fort, marked by a Weirwood, The Wall marked by a weirwood grove, Bran and Blood raven, marked by a weirwood, Winterfell, marked by a weirwood. Red squares on the white side of the board. House of the Undying, blue square on the black side of the board.

I've been pondering the various color pairings and inversions and trying to make sense of them, and this though hadn't occurred to me. General we see black and red paired together, and blue and white. But the trees invert this, although weirwoods to bring black into the picture with the black ravens which tend to perch in them and the black pond beneath the most significant of weirwoods. @Sly Wren and I like to go round and round about whether the needed "hero's sword" will be a black sword burning red (my vote) or a white sword burning red (Sly Wren's vote). Not sure if you have read Sly's essay about Jon and the Sword of the Morning, but I think you probably like it. 

 

3 hours ago, Ser Creighton said:

All in all a solid theory on Gargoyle Tyrion LmL, and you Rhaenys, I will convert you to the darkside. After all as you point out, it's the winning team. We are over here with Uncle Tyrion, Aunt Dany, Nephew Jon, Cousin Arya, Cousin Bran, Cousin in the wrong place Sansa. Come to us, it's better over here. We are going to win, we have Dany, Tyrion, Jon, Bran, and Arya, that's it man game over. It's a family event. Targs rule, Others drool. Come to us. You know our ally is the force too, the Jedi are always bragging, but hello we use it all the time, and it looks better on us and our powers are cooler. Come on, it will be okay, we are going to kill White White Walkers, get it "White" Walkers. Bunch bus wankers coming down out of the Hill Billy north, to mess with the Royal Family. Come on now, we got Dragons over here, we ride them, and sometimes we drop water balloons on people. It's fun.

LoL got a kick out of this last paragraph. 

 

3 hours ago, Ser Creighton said:

The idea that Tyrion is a secret Targ has most often had it's detractors from Secret Targ Jon fans. Or people who feel it will somehow effect his relationship with Tywin. Where very little would seem to change between the way Jon felt about Ned or Tyrion would feel about Tywin. But you never know fans got upset when they felt Cersie's motivation as a character changed when we found out about the Maggy prophecy. Yet Cersei was a sociopath well before that as she demonstrated that very day by murdering a little girl. Any reveal for Jon or Tyrion does not change who Ned or Tywin were. Both men seem to have had their share of secrets, when you find out, it does not really change the character, you just get more insight into them.

Ditto on all of this.

As for lions and dragons in general, I believe the main thing is this idea of the sun transforming. In classical Alchemical 'doctrine,' as it were, they make a big deal out of the idea that everything and everyone has a shadow or shadow self. They saw the bright sun as a lion and the "dark sun" or "night sun" as a dragon.  That's what he's referencing, I believe, when he's taking about the twisted gargoyles in Bran's dream with the line "they might have been lions once." The Lion of Night is another way of expressing the darkened sun idea - the inversion of a bright solar lion. In Yi Tish legend, the Lion of Night comes out to ravage the earth during the Long Night, where previously he and the maiden made of light (the bright sun who hid her face during the LN) were in harmony. A great callout to these ideas comes in the form of the black tomcat Arya chases around in King's Landing. That is of course Princess Rhaenys' cat named Balerion. That's a black cat (Lion of Night) named after the black dragon of black dragons, Balerion. Arya herself is a supreme death goddess - she's a Nightwolf, a Dark Heart, Blood Child, and a Cat - a Lioness of Night, I would say. Lots of great symbolism I am saving for an Arya essay going on in King's Landing and at Harrenhall (where she becomes "the ghost in Harrenhall"). 

Shadows cats are the same idea as the Lion of Night. Shadow-cat. 

So as for Dany and her white lion pelt... after she is reborn in fire, she talks about wearing the pelt to show everyone that Drogo's strength resided inside her. Drogo is of course a prime solar character, so Dany's white lion pelt kind of shows her bright solar side. My theory is that after the rebirth in the pyre, she becomes a solar character, so the black dragon / white lion duality might be showing us the bright sun / dark sun thing. Of course the black dragon symbol is mainly a reference to the moon meteor children of sun and moon, which is one half reborn sun and one half reborn moon. So... it gets a bit murky after the end of AGOT, because she is clearly taking on many solar symbols and becoming a Khaleesi and a Queen, but she still occasionally manifests her moon symbolism. Before her rebirth in the pyre, it's all very clean - she's the moon, Drogo her sun. 

For example, I believe she is doing the two moon w-ives thing that many solar kings like Aegon the C and Rhaegar do... but she takes an ice husband and fire husband instead. Daario, who looks oh so Targaryen in many scenes with his purple and gold coloring and fiery personality, would be her fire moon husband, while Hizdhar of the icy dream cock and tepid kisses would be her icy moon husband. George seems to like to repeat the sun and moon rebirth cycles with his characters in many chapters - they don't just do it once and that's it. Moon do the Nissa Nissa on multiple occasions, so I do not think we are meant to view the entire plot arc as the only iteration of the Lightbringer forging pattern. I think you really have to take each scene and chapter on its own. 

I wouldn't swear to any of that, of course. I'm always confident in my main hypothesis, but the finer points are clearly quite subjective and it's very easy to read patterns into things when we have so many repeating symbols. I usually tend to grab the most clear examples of things for the essays. 

Anyway the Tyrion - sphinx thing is pretty cool and something which I'll have to loo into further. I really think it has to do with becoming a dragonrider - the riddle of the sphinx has to do with the dragon bond. I like that theory anyway. The idea that a dragon statue with a human head represents a human in control of the human-animal bond is something @Evolett has suggested. She also suggests the symbol of Robb with his direwolf's head, both in Dany's vision in the HOTU and in real life, suggests a man who did not master his human-animal bond.