Mythical Astronomy of Ice and Fire 5: Tyrion Targaryen

[Ser Creighton]

2 hours ago, Elisabetta Duò said:

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.

My concern for Sansa is that she turned away from Tyrion. Not that she should of been forced to marry him of course. Just the nature of the relationship, she resents Tyrion and wishes to be a away from him. She flees of course and ends up in the Vale, symbolic home to the moon, and tied to the colors blue and white.

As I see it, the Vale is the original home and invasion point of the Andals. The children also fought the Andals, there at Moat Cailin they once again called down the hammer of the waters. The Barrow lands are just north of Moat Cailin, and as mentioned there were once Barrow Night's, and a Barrow King, the first King. A curse upon any man who seeks to rival the Barrow King. House Dustin claims decent from the first king, their symbol was is an Axe. Same as the Andals. 

The Night's King may very well not be a Stark or a Bolton. But an Andal, perhaps even an Arryn. And the first men and the Andlas may very well be one and the same. It may just be symbolic, but the Mountains of the moon, the moon brothers, the symbol of the moon.

Now the thing is the first men were like the Wildlings, Nomadic, they didn't build castles, maybe a ring fort, they did not have kings, these were customs adopted buy them after the Andal invasion. So the first men invaded in the south, and the Andals in the north. One through the vale, and one through the arm Dorne. The first king was an Andal, a man of the axe as the sigil indicates. At some point it inverted, perhaps the Andals were fleeing the Others.

So lets say the Night Fort which is a castle, was built by an Andal. Now it works out nicely that the Rat Cook served the Andal King of the Night Fort, his son in a pie. That King is said to have been from the Vale or the Rock. Danny Flint, a girl. Have you ever seen the sigil of House Flint of Widows Watch? Blue eyes, like the Night's Queen. The apprentice boys faced that thing that came in the Night. What else comes in the Night. Mad Axe who came and butchered his own men in the night. Again the Axe. They are all the same person. 

It's not a good place for Sansa to be, the Vale. No weirwood. The symbolism is bad. It may seem safe, but the symbolism is bad. Not to say that is everything. When your a Stark and you got Targaryens in the family, and your sort of husband is probably a Gargoyle Sphinx riding a dragon, things can turn on a dime.

[LmL]

4 hours ago, Elisabetta Duò said:

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. 

 

 

Hey @Elisabetta Duò, I have to say your comments are well thought and have given me food for thought. I don't necessarily agree with all of your points, but I see merit in others. But I would ask, don't some of these same things apply to RLJ? Jon was treated as an outsider, and it turns out, he's not even Ned's child or siblings to any of them. I do see you points, but I think in the end what this is about is dragons. Tyrion's dragon associations, dragon dreams, and dragon-based mythological influences are, to me, pretty strong proof. As for thematic-based arguments, I think there are interesting ramifications in either scenario, as you say, so I don't find those argument sot really point clearly in either direction. 

ANothe brig clue is the fact that TWOIAF specifically gave us the information that Aerys and Joanna were in the same place when Tyrion would have been conceived... that just seems like a bit of a give-away to me. TWOIAF was basically a bag of clues to all the mysteries in the book series, and that's also where we learned that there was a Targaryen with dichromism, Shiera Sea-Star. That's a ridiculous comet name, btw, since Shierra Quiya means bleeding star in Dothraki and sea-star is just another way to say sea-dragon. Anyway, point is, TWOIAF just seems to be feeding us Tyrion Targ clues (there are others, too, I want to say). I'm not saying the theory is a fact, I'm juts saying the evidence really seems to be pointing that way. If he isn't a Targ, George is intentionally creating a pretty large red herring bloody white dragon-herring. 

[LmL]

@Ser Creighton, I'm sure you've noticed Sansa's Night's Queen symbolism int he snow castle chapter, right? She's even making "snow knights," like children make.

[Ser Creighton]

3 minutes ago, LmL said:

@Ser Creighton, I'm sure you've noticed Sansa's Night's Queen symbolism int he snow castle chapter, right? She's even making "snow knights," like children make.

I have, I also noted that at the Night Fort there was a girl Danny. Now if the this King pursued this girl who may have been a queen, I do not think it's a coincidence her name is Danny, and we have another Queen named Dany. Martin is way to smart  not to notice. 

[LmL]

1 hour ago, Ser Creighton said:

I have, I also noted that at the Night Fort there was a girl Danny. Now if the this King pursued this girl who may have been a queen, I do not think it's a coincidence her name is Danny, and we have another Queen named Dany. Martin is way to smart  not to notice. 

Yeah I hadn't thought about Danny Flint much, but now that you mention it... and flint is a stow which produces fire. Their sigil has blue eyes? So it does.

Potential parallels between the Night's Queen and Dany make me think of the idea that the Amethyst Empress / Nissa Nissa became the Night's Queen somehow.  

[LmL]

The del;event thing here to my theory is the question of one or two moons. Dany and Mel are fire-asssocioated moon maidens, while Lyanna and "Night's Queen" are icy moon maidens. Dany is a parallel to Nissa Nisa, whom I believe is the same person as the Amethyst Empress. So... if the fiery moon maiden BECAME the icy one, say when she gave her warmth to Lightbringer, that would line up with not two moons, but one moon, which transforms from fire to ice, or from fire to frozen fire, however you want to say it. I think there is more evidence pointing towards to separate moons, but there's all some pointing towards one split or transformed moon. Thoughts?

Sansa could be a character who shows fire and ice moon symbolism, but most other moon maidens seem to be one or the other. Dany isn't icy, for example. Rhaegar marries Elia of Dorne, with her sun sigil, and Lyanna of the blue winter rose. Elia doesn't become Lyanna, and Elia doesn't become cold. Aegon the C had two wives, which I think track very nicely with ice and fire moons, and sisters is exactly how I see the two moons. But the HOBAW shows a black and white split moon face... 

[LmL]

An interesting member of House Flint here:

Quote

 Lord Commander Rodrik Flint is regarded as one of the worst commanders of the Night's Watch, for trying to make himself King-Beyond-the-Wall.

 

[Elisabetta Duò]

9 hours ago, LmL said:

Hey @Elisabetta Duò, I have to say your comments are well thought and have given me food for thought. I don't necessarily agree with all of your points, but I see merit in others. But I would ask, don't some of these same things apply to RLJ? Jon was treated as an outsider, and it turns out, he's not even Ned's child or siblings to any of them. I do see you points, but I think in the end what this is about is dragons. Tyrion's dragon associations, dragon dreams, and dragon-based mythological influences are, to me, pretty strong proof. As for thematic-based arguments, I think there are interesting ramifications in either scenario, as you say, so I don't find those argument sot really point clearly in either direction. 

ANothe brig clue is the fact that TWOIAF specifically gave us the information that Aerys and Joanna were in the same place when Tyrion would have been conceived... that just seems like a bit of a give-away to me. TWOIAF was basically a bag of clues to all the mysteries in the book series, and that's also where we learned that there was a Targaryen with dichromism, Shiera Sea-Star. That's a ridiculous comet name, btw, since Shierra Quiya means bleeding star in Dothraki and sea-star is just another way to say sea-dragon. Anyway, point is, TWOIAF just seems to be feeding us Tyrion Targ clues (there are others, too, I want to say). I'm not saying the theory is a fact, I'm juts saying the evidence really seems to be pointing that way. If he isn't a Targ, George is intentionally creating a pretty large red herring bloody white dragon-herring. 

Oh yes (I would ask, don't some of these same things apply to RLJ), that's certainly true (even if Ned+Jon wasn't nearly as dramatic as Tyrion+Tywin, Ned didn't hate Jon, he didn't treat him as his own son but he didn't treath him like sh** either and he kinda 'loved' him, so the 'impact' will be smaller under this perspective). To be 100% honest, the thing is I'm not a big Jon Snow fan (I've never been one falling for the 'classical hero' in his shining armour), I find the character boring and RLJ is 'confirmed' already (I mean, com'on...), so much that I don't even understand why people keep talking about it... that's why I don't post into the RLJ threads... I don't really care about Jon's parents (even if of course I'm not blind enough to not notice it will have a huge impact on the story) and I take R+L=J for granted...I had no idea of who the mother and father were, but since book 1 we could guess Ned wasn't the father, there was way too much insistence on the contrast betweenb Ned the honorable man and Ned the father of bastards to not notice (I'm a crime novels reader xd).

I also thought, trying to watch things by an A+J=T point of view, that maybe GRRM, surprised and 'annoyed' that way too many people realized R+L=J that early, started to be more careful about A+J=T as the series went on, hoping people would be slower about it (for example, Tyrion's hair color is described in different ways in the books). Anyway, we'll see. I'm really curious to know how this will play out and I hope GRRM decides to keep his antihero alive in the end.

 

[Elisabetta Duò]

9 hours ago, Ser Creighton said:

My concern for Sansa is that she turned away from Tyrion. Not that she should of been forced to marry him of course. Just the nature of the relationship, she resents Tyrion and wishes to be a away from him. She flees of course and ends up in the Vale, symbolic home to the moon, and tied to the colors blue and white.

As I see it, the Vale is the original home and invasion point of the Andals. The children also fought the Andals, there at Moat Cailin they once again called down the hammer of the waters. The Barrow lands are just north of Moat Cailin, and as mentioned there were once Barrow Night's, and a Barrow King, the first King. A curse upon any man who seeks to rival the Barrow King. House Dustin claims decent from the first king, their symbol was is an Axe. Same as the Andals. 

The Night's King may very well not be a Stark or a Bolton. But an Andal, perhaps even an Arryn. And the first men and the Andlas may very well be one and the same. It may just be symbolic, but the Mountains of the moon, the moon brothers, the symbol of the moon.

Now the thing is the first men were like the Wildlings, Nomadic, they didn't build castles, maybe a ring fort, they did not have kings, these were customs adopted buy them after the Andal invasion. So the first men invaded in the south, and the Andals in the north. One through the vale, and one through the arm Dorne. The first king was an Andal, a man of the axe as the sigil indicates. At some point it inverted, perhaps the Andals were fleeing the Others.

So lets say the Night Fort which is a castle, was built by an Andal. Now it works out nicely that the Rat Cook served the Andal King of the Night Fort, his son in a pie. That King is said to have been from the Vale or the Rock. Danny Flint, a girl. Have you ever seen the sigil of House Flint of Widows Watch? Blue eyes, like the Night's Queen. The apprentice boys faced that thing that came in the Night. What else comes in the Night. Mad Axe who came and butchered his own men in the night. Again the Axe. They are all the same person. 

It's not a good place for Sansa to be, the Vale. No weirwood. The symbolism is bad. It may seem safe, but the symbolism is bad. Not to say that is everything. When your a Stark and you got Targaryens in the family, and your sort of husband is probably a Gargoyle Sphinx riding a dragon, things can turn on a dime.

I misunderstood your comment then, my apologies. I just thought you meant 'generically speaking', I didn't think you were referring to the symbolism (I'm not into it so I won't be talkiung about it, I wouldn't without researching it).

I don't think Sansa still resents Tyrion though, it's true she fled and  she didn't want to marry a Lannister at all, nor a man she didn't find attractive, but now it seems she always remembers him as a kind man. At the most, it's him who resents her for 'abandoning' him, even if it's more the thought of a betrayed-by-everyone man than a rational thinking.. he knows she was a scared child at the time, I don't think he would really hold that against her.. and we have the notorious quote about missing the wife, where imo GRRM is being ambiguous on purpose: “What do you miss, Halfman?" Jaime, thought Tyrion. Shae. Tysha. My wife, I miss my wife, the wife I hardly knew. "Wine, whores, and wealth," he answered.

GRRM could have had him say “Shae. Tysha, my wife ” => 1. Shae, 2. his former wife Tysha.

but instead he wrote “Shae. Tysha. My wife” => 1. Shae. 2 Tysha. 3 His current wife, Sansa.

I don't think GRRM is the kind of author who uses a "," or a "." indifferently, so whatever he is doing here (it may still be about Tysha and the "." might be there just to add more emphasis and/or to represent Tyrion's fragmented and broken way of thinking), it's meant to be ambiguous imo. If it's about Sansa, then it's meant to be a misleading quote concealing a clue (almost everyone will think he misses just Tysha, while he misses Sansa also, which in theory might prove to be relevant in the future, possibly when he has to chose sides or spare her life or who knows).

[Destiel's Child]

Really great work.  I always enjoy listening.

[Evolett]

Oh, I see you have a new essay out . I'm yet to read it - just want to say I'm convinced Tyrion is a Targaryen and look forward to how you've applied celestial imagery to this and to finding out if what you theorize fits in with my genetic approach to the subject of 'dragon heads'.

[LmL]

8 hours ago, Stoned_Heart said:

Really great work.  I always enjoy listening.

Why thank you! Can I ask you a question? Do you tend to listen in chunks / by section, or do you tend to listen all the way through? Trying to get a feel for the best way to present / organize this stuff.  TY!

5 hours ago, Evolett said:

Oh, I see you have a new essay out . I'm yet to read it - just want to say I'm convinced Tyrion is a Targaryen and look forward to how you've applied celestial imagery to this and to finding out if what you theorize fits in with my genetic approach to the subject of 'dragon heads'.

Cool, I always love it when we get to the same conclusions via completely different approaches.

[Durran Durrandon]

On 6/6/2016 at 10:55 AM, LmL said:

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

 

Character driven has definitely works for Radio Westeros. As for length, as my time has gotten more restrained, I have had trouble consuming long posts and following them in threads. Which is funny, because I struggle with keep my own  writing short. However, I drive a Los Angeles commute, so long podcasts are pretty easy for me.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

Ok, second attempt to respond. I had written my reply sunday evening, but when I was ready to press "submit reply", my internet connection was gone, and did not return for the remainder of that day. 

Nor did the forum save my reply (because, of course, you need an internet connection for that  )

 

On 5-6-2016 at 10:40 AM, LmL said:

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.  

I am not convinced by the clues presented for the AJT theory, no, but my response was not at all meant as an argument against the theory. At all.

 

On 5-6-2016 at 10:40 AM, LmL said:

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. 

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. 

 

I think that the quotes do suggest that the dragons seen on Dragonstone are not part of the gargoyles. George took care to describe the gargoyles found on Dragonstone. But he mentions no dragons amongst them. Instead, the dragons, who are "everywhere" are the shape of the buildings (e.g. the Great Hall, the kitchens, the towers)... But he does not mention any gargoyles in the shapes of dragons.  Now, of course neither Cressen nor Davos describe all of the thousand gargoyles on Dragonstone (and considering there are a thousand, really, who can blame them?), but it is interesting to list so many different gargoyle-descriptions, and leave out the dragons. They would be the ones that you'd expect, after all. I had certainly expected to come across at least one. I had read and looked at the gargoyles before reading your fifth essay, but your essay made me research them again out of curiosity, and I was actually rather surprised to find that the dragons are not only left out of the gargoyle-descriptions, but actually listed separated from them, by this Davos quote:

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.

If the stone dragons are gargoyles, why say, in essence, "gargoyles and gargoyles"? Makes little sense, I think. It would be like saying (a rather simplistic example) "we have fruit and apples". Apples are fruit, so you'd never say it like this, I think.

Which makes me conclude, at the moment, that he stone dragons mentioned by Davos here, as well as in the quote I quoted in my earlier post  (mentioning smaller dragons on top of the gates), are regular statues, and not gargoyles. After all, normals statues and gargoyles, despite having many similarities, are not the same thing. Sure, they are both made of stone, and can both sit on walls.. Who said that they couldn't? That doesn't mean that they are the same, though.

 

 

On 5-6-2016 at 10:40 AM, LmL said:

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. 

I'm not trying to set it aside. But rather, I have a different interpretation for that.

Instead of it meaning that Tyrion is a dragon (just because the first real-life gargoyles were dragons), is it not possible that Tyrion has "function" (for lack of a better word) which is parallel with one of the earlier dragons? If my interpretation from above is correct, George has chosen not to have a dragon-gargoyle be present in the current story (only stone dragon statues).

So then what could the parallel be? Perhaps something that connects back to the "Tyrion is the guardian/power/big shadow/counselor to the dragons" role... Will Tyrion's future role perhaps become similar to the role of the "first" counseler to the dragons? The first Hand, Orys Baratheon, who was rumored to have been a dragon himsefl (as Aegon's half-brother)?

 

On 5-6-2016 at 10:40 AM, LmL said:

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. 

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.

I did not mean to say that we will see gargoyles anywhere else in Westeros. I meant that, while I expect they are present all over Westeros, the fact that they are only described and mentioned in those two specific places (Winterfell and Dragonstone) probably means something (and on that, I think, we agree).
 

On 5-6-2016 at 10:40 AM, LmL said:

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

I say yes!

 

On 5-6-2016 at 10:40 AM, LmL said:

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. 

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 riddle of the sphinx is connected with the Targaryens, to be sure. But why look only at Valyrian sphinxes? And Tyrion being a Valyrian sphinx would make him half a man and half a dragon, not half a dragon and half a lion (which, if we follow such symbolism, would be the expected outcome).

But being connected to Targaryens is not the same as riding a dragon. 
What to make of this quote, I don't know at the moment, but the wording caught my attention, and I figured I'd place it here.

Most of the stories you hear about dragons are fodder for fools. Talking dragons, dragons hoarding gold and gems, dragons with four legs and bellies big as elephants, dragons riddling with sphinxes … nonsense, all of it. But there are truths in the old books as well.

 

On 5-6-2016 at 10:40 AM, LmL said:

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?

Tyrion is the riddle, the shadow on the wall, the one where people believe power resides. It's not just that he casts a large shadow, it's that he's the "small man can cast a large shadow", a shadow making him look "as tall as a king"... If he's the Kings's (or Queen's) most important and powerful counseler, he'll fullfill the function of the Hand.. The closest thing to being a King, without actually being a King.

 

On 5-6-2016 at 10:40 AM, LmL said:

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? 

 

I've said this before, but the cyvasse symbolism pattern I've laid out in the essay does not have to be the only meaning that can be attributed to them - though it is a rather consistent one, and I'm entirely convinced by it. And the nice thing is, that the color can change as needed for each situation, for each character. That's why Tyrion has been able to play with both white and black cyvasse pieces. 

For example,

Spoiler

In the first Tyrion chapter from Winds, according to the notes taken at a reading, Tyrion was trying to convince Plumm to switch sides (from Yunkai to Daenerys), and he is trying to do so whilst playing an actual cyvasse game. According to the notes, Tyrion is winning the game. Unsurprisingly (according to the pattern as proposed in the essay), Plumm later also decides to change sides, making Tyrion's attempts during the game successful. Therefore, I would expect that Tyrion, in the full chapter, is indeed playing with the black cyvasse pieces, (assuming that George is going to mention their color), as those symbolise the win Tyrion has just achieved.

 

Also, I'm not speaking simply about the loss of a trebuchet.. I'm rather speaking of the loss of all trebuchets protected by sellswords, the most powerful weapons the Yunkai'i  currently have against the dragons.

How the color symbolism extends to the actual living black and white dragon, I don't know. I'm not sure whether it extends that far. Haven't looked at Bloodraven for this, but I might do so

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

On 6-6-2016 at 6:56 AM, LmL said:

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

Perhaps some function is still turned off due to it being show-season?

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

20 hours ago, Elisabetta Duò said:

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

  Hide contents

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,

  Hide contents

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

  Reveal hidden contents

(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. 

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).

Could you perhaps elaborate? How will Tyrion use Viserion, do you think, to take his revenge?

 

18 hours ago, Ser Creighton said:

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.

Thank you for the kind words  

18 hours ago, Ser Creighton said:

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.

Symbolically, you mean?

 

18 hours ago, Ser Creighton said:

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).

Hmm.. I've seen it suggested that Tyrion's eye color is a hint that he'll find himself in between the two claimants during the second Dance, considering the first Dance was fought between the blacks and the greens.

 

18 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.

[LiveFirstDieLater]

First things first LmL, while I think you might get a little carried away with the symbolism, especially the whole two moon thing, as always you provide a good read and I enjoyed the post.

With that said, I have one point and one question... Totally unrelated to each other.

I feel like the one of the biggest pieces of evidence for secret Targs has been around since I was a kid reading GoT and is worthy of note:

There are 8 pov characters in GoT, listed here in order of age:

Cat, Ned, Tyrion, Jon, Dany, Sansa, Arya, and Bran...

Ned and Cat, Dad and Mom, are both varying degrees of dead... And the last three we can pretty safely say are true born Starks.

The middle three sure seem to be Targs to me, all raised by not "blood" parents... And giving you three "heads" for your dragon. 

I find it a coincidence that is hard to overlook...

Ok now the question...

Given: 

"The gargoyles watched him ascend. Their eyes glowed red as hot coals in a brazier. Perhaps once they had been lions, but now they were twisted and grotesque. Bran could hear them whispering to each other in soft stone voices terrible to hear. He must not listen, he told himself, he must not hear, so long as he did not hear them he was safe. But when the gargoyles pulled themselves loose from the stone and padded down the side of the tower to where Bran clung, he knew he was not safe after all."

And the gargoyles here in Bran's dream are clearly Jaime and Cersei...

Do you think these two are Targaryens too?

[LmL]

10 minutes ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

First things first LmL, while I think you might get a little carried away with the symbolism, especially the whole two moon thing, as always you provide a good read and I enjoyed the post.

To which I can only plead 'guilty.'

10 minutes ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

With that said, I have one point and one question... Totally unrelated to each other.

I feel like the one of the biggest pieces of evidence for secret Targs has been around since I was a kid reading GoT and is worthy of note:

There are 8 pov characters in GoT, listed here in order of age:

Cat, Ned, Tyrion, Jon, Dany, Sansa, Arya, and Bran...

Ned and Cat, Dad and Mom, are both varying degrees of dead... And the last three we can pretty safely say are true born Starks.

The middle three sure seem to be Targs to me, all raised by not "blood" parents... And giving you three "heads" for your dragon. 

I find it a coincidence that is hard to overlook...

Ok now the question...

Given: 

"The gargoyles watched him ascend. Their eyes glowed red as hot coals in a brazier. Perhaps once they had been lions, but now they were twisted and grotesque. Bran could hear them whispering to each other in soft stone voices terrible to hear. He must not listen, he told himself, he must not hear, so long as he did not hear them he was safe. But when the gargoyles pulled themselves loose from the stone and padded down the side of the tower to where Bran clung, he knew he was not safe after all."

And the gargoyles here in Bran's dream are clearly Jaime and Cersei...

Do you think these two are Targaryens too?

For the purposes of Bran's dream, they represent Jaime and Cersei, yes, or perhaps "lions" (House Lannister) to some extent. But Jaine and Cersei are not ever called gargoyles - it's not a part of the personal symbolism Martin has given them. Tyrion however is labeled a gargoyle many times, so I do consider it a part of his personal symbolism. 

Does that make sense? 

Great observation on the POVs from AGOT. It does make sense.

[LiveFirstDieLater]

9 minutes ago, LmL said:

To which I can only plead 'guilty.'

For the purposes of Bran's dream, they represent Jaime and Cersei, yes, or perhaps "lions" (House Lannister) to some extent. But Jaine and Cersei are not ever called gargoyles - it's not a part of the personal symbolism Martin has given them. Tyrion however is labeled a gargoyle many times, so I do consider it a part of his personal symbolism. 

Does that make sense? 

Great observation on the POVs from AGOT. It does make sense.

Honest and fair... Makes total sense

I was really just asking your personal opinion on the question...

I mean there would be some irony in Jaime being the one who killed his dad and not Tyrion... Not to mention the whole incest thing.

but I don't really think it will be the case myself

[Ser Creighton]

20 hours ago, LmL said:

@Ser Creighton

@Sly Wren

@Evolett

 

Sort of a double post?