Jump to content

R+L=J v.161


RumHam

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Chib said:

In my opinion, Jon is still a bastard because even if R+J got married officially, who would believe that? It was like over 20 years ago or so 

One needs to consider that if Jon were to find out, if he will make the claim.  No one needs to prove anything for Jon to make the claim, just as no one needs to prove that Daenerys is not a bastard, or is Rhaella's daughter.  (There is no one currently living that can testify to either.)  If there is a Great Council called to make a determination, it seems pretty obvious which way that will go.  In fact, Daenerys is foreshadowed as bowing low (painfully, as resisting causes her to suffer) to the hidden dragon, which of course would be Jon Targaryen (Snow). 

There is one person who can know without error, Bran, by observing through the weirwood-net.  Does that need to be done?  Not likely.  This is a time of honor, and making a claim (especially by a well known person of honor) would not be challenged without good cause. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uh. did the thread just get rolled back a few posts? I can't think of any reason a moderator would have deleted them.

our ago, MtnLion said:

This is a time of honor, and making a claim (especially by a well known person of honor) would not be challenged without good cause. 

Anyway, this is another ridiculous statement. Anyone who didn't want Jon on the throne would question his claim for political reasons. Honor means nothing in the game of thrones. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Well, we don't know what exactly Ned promised Lyanna, or do we?

Lyanna has no way to learn any details about the treatment Rhaegar's children received at the hands of the Lannisters, and the chances that Ned took his time to trouble his dying sister with that kind of talk is pretty unlikely.

I notice that you focus on the one line I included about Lyanna and promise, which I stated was not the main argument I was making. The main argument basically is that Ned simply could not be sure what Robert would do if he found out about RLJ -- and Ned simply could not take the chance. The risk was too high that Robert would have had Jon killed.  After the deaths of Elia and the children, Ned could not know for sure how Robert would react to the information -- and the only way to ensure that Jon remained safe was to keep his real identity a secret.

ETA: Fixed the post I meant to be responding to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RumHam said:

Uh. did the thread just get rolled back a few posts? I can't think of any reason a moderator would have deleted them.

Anyway, this is another ridiculous statement. Anyone who didn't want Jon on the throne would question his claim for political reasons. Honor means nothing in the game of thrones. 

I have always maintained that Jon being "true-born" is at least as important for what it will mean to Jon personally as any implications for the Game of Thrones. I am not even certain it ever will become widely known -- but being true-born is important to the plot either way because ti will have an effect on Jon.

 But GRRM is creative, and if he wants the information to be known definitely -- it will happen -- and if he wants the information to be challenged by a rival -- it will be challenged. GRRM is the master of this story, and whatever development he thinks works best for the plot will happen -- there is no "inevitable" outcome regarding whether or how this information becomes widely known. GRRM has left open innumerable ways to resolve this issue -- and anyone who thinks it is "impossible" for this information to be confirmed simply does not give GRRM enough credit for his level of creativity. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

I have always maintained that Jon being "true-born" is at least as important for what it will mean to Jon personally as any implications for the Game of Thrones. I am not even certain it ever will become widely known -- but being true-born is important to the plot either way because ti will have an effect on Jon.

 But GRRM is creative, and if he wants the information to be known definitely -- it will happen -- and if he wants the information to be challenged by a rival -- it will be challenged. GRRM is the master of this story, and whatever development he thinks works best for the plot will happen -- there is no "inevitable" outcome regarding whether or how this information becomes widely known. GRRM has left open innumerable ways to resolve this issue -- and anyone who thinks it is "impossible" for this information to be confirmed simply does not give GRRM enough credit for his level of creativity. 

I'm not really sure why this was addressed to me. I don't disagree with any of it. I never used the words "inevitable" or "impossible." I just stated that the idea that "This is a time of honor" and people wouldn't question the claims of others unless they had just cause is laughable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

I notice that you focus on the one line I included about Lyanna and promise, which I stated was not the main argument I was making. The main argument basically is that Ned simply could not be sure what Robert would do if he found out about RLJ -- and Ned simply could not take the chance. The risk was too high that Robert would have had Jon killed.  After the deaths of Elia and the children, Ned could not know for sure how Robert would react to the information -- and the only way to ensure that Jon remained safe was to keep his real identity a secret.

Well, there is one truth as to why Ned did what he did. I happen to be more inclined to believe that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married, that this was public knowledge, and that he therefore feared for the boy's life in light of what happened to Rhaegar's other children.

I don't think that a general statement about what Ned would have done under such and such a scenario makes much sense, especially considering that he remained the friend of that guy. I'd not be the friend of a man who might happen to kill my sister's child under any circumstances.

The idea that Robert would have killed a bastard child of Lyanna's under any circumstances is bold claim that is not backed by evidence at all.

In fact, I'm not even sure Robert would ever have personally commanded the murder of Lyanna's child nor do I think that Ned ever feared something like that. What Ned feared was that Robert would close the eyes if some other ruthless guy in Robert's employ (Jaime or Tywin) would have allowed it to happen.

If Ned feared Robert would harm his nephew or any of his family he simply wouldn't have remained his friend and then we would have been introduced to Ned Stark as a potential Targaryen ally in waiting in AGoT, not as Robert's best buddy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Well, there is one truth as to why Ned did what he did. I happen to be more inclined to believe that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married, that this was public knowledge, and that he therefore feared for the boy's life in light of what happened to Rhaegar's other children.

I don't think that a general statement about what Ned would have done under such and such a scenario makes much sense, especially considering that he remained the friend of that guy. I'd not be the friend of a man who might happen to kill my sister's child under any circumstances.

The idea that Robert would have killed a bastard child of Lyanna's under any circumstances is bold claim that is not backed by evidence at all.

In fact, I'm not even sure Robert would ever have personally commanded the murder of Lyanna's child nor do I think that Ned ever feared something like that. What Ned feared was that Robert would close the eyes if some other ruthless guy in Robert's employ (Jaime or Tywin) would have allowed it to happen.

If Ned feared Robert would harm his nephew or any of his family he simply wouldn't have remained his friend and then we would have been introduced to Ned Stark as a potential Targaryen ally in waiting in AGoT, not as Robert's best buddy.

I disagree that "there is one truth as to why Ned did what he did." GRRM might not ever clarify this point -- and people do things for multiple reasons. But I don't know how you can be so convinced that Ned would not think that Robert would kill Jon if Robert knew the truth -- not definitely, but a possible risk. Of course Ned can still be friends -- if killing Elia and the children does not end their friendship -- the theoretical possibility of what Robert might do under hypothetical circumstances will not end it. And Ned kept his distance for years until Robert came to ask Ned to be Hand -- but Ned would understand why Robert might feel the need to eliminate a threat to his reign. And why is it impossible to be friends with Robert if it might be a direct action but not if it might be an implicit permission to Lannister or other allies? How can you be so certain of such a fine line?

GRRM gives foreshadowing and clues regarding plot developments (like RLJ itself). GRRM does not give enough information for the readers to be certain whether Ned feared Robert direct action or other potential threats. So I am comfortable making predictions about plot developments like RLJ -- but being so certain about the motives of a fictional character -- when alternative motives could fit the facts given to the readers -- simply is not something I think the readers really can do with any degree of confidence. 

Oh, and I think you know that I firmly believe that we have sufficient clues to conclude that Jon is the true-born son of Rhaegar. I agree that Ned's fear for Jon's safety is one of these clues, as a bastard would not be as much of a threat -- although again, Ned might not want to take any chances with Jon's safety even if he had been a bastard son of Rhaegar. But under no circumstances would it makes sense for Ned to be a Targ ally in waiting -- risking his family and his people for a dynasty he did not believe in -- just because he thought that Robert might kill Jon if Robert knew the truth. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@UnmaskedLurker

I guess I am just convinced ;-).

Robert could always find out the truth. And if Ned believed he would then kill Jon he would never have been his friend but just a guy who feigned friendship all that time because you cannot really be friends with a guy who might murder your innocent nephew.

Ned doesn't understand the murder of children under any circumstances. Just look how he reacted to the plans to murder Daenerys or the prospect of being the guy responsible for Robert murdering his own children.

The problem I have with this idea that even a Targaryen bastard was a threat to Robert is the fact that there is no time or opportunity for Ned to develop such an opinion.

1. Robert never commanded the murder or any royal children, he just didn't punish Tywin and Jaime.

2. While Robert wasn't yet king he had not yet any dynastic reasons to kill all the Targaryens as he later might. There is no evidence that personally loathed Elia, the children, Prince Viserys, or Queen Rhaella.

3. A bastard simply has no dynastic importance whatsoever.

Sure, Ned could also have been afraid of his own shadow his entire life but how likely is that?

My argument is that Ned might have decided to raise the child as his bastard nephew if Lyanna and Rhaegar were not married, or that he might at least have revealed the truth to Catelyn and Jon if Lyanna and Rhaegar hadn't been married. There wouldn't have been much harm in that.

And this line of thought also works in a scenario of a super secret wedding because a super secret wedding is essentially no wedding at all. Ned could tell people whatever the hell he wanted if he controlled the information. He could have told Cat/Jon that Jon was Lyanna's bastard even if in truth was her legitimate son.

In fact, if he had poisoned the well is such a fashion no one would ever have believed that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married because anyone claiming that would go against the word of Eddard Stark.

But it seems he couldn't take that road at all because people might have known about that marriage (whatever validity it held in the eyes of the world). Not all that much in my opinion, but that is a separate issue entirely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Lord Varys--

I am a bit confused about what you are really arguing. You go on and on about a bastard being no threat to Robert and a secret wedding not being provable.

As I have said, I think R&L were married, so Jon was not a bastard. I think the evidence of such a marriage is fairly strong -- and I thought you agreed that a wedding of some kind likely occurred. And even if the wedding was "secret" there were people who were there -- perhaps JonCon among others -- who are still alive. So if Jon is revealed as the son of Lyanna -- and then others come forward as witnesses to the wedding (Ned might not even know exactly who was a witness), Jon as the legit son of Rhaegar could become an issue. So this situation is the one that I really think Ned was forced to confront -- not one where Ned could be sure he could pass Jon off as the bastard son of Rhaegar if he had wanted to do so.

But the main point is that being worried about Robert killing Jon or being worried about others, like the Lannisters, killing Jon is just too fine a line for me to distinguish. Ned understood that Jon's life could be in danger if the truth got out (whether the "real" truth or the variation where Jon is passed off as Rhaegar's bastard). Maybe from Robert -- maybe only from others -- not really that important a distinction -- Ned had good reason to fear for Jon's safety if the the identity of his parents became known -- so Ned kept the truth a secret.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

@Lord Varys--

I am a bit confused about what you are really arguing. You go on and on about a bastard being no threat to Robert and a secret wedding not being provable.

As I have said, I think R&L were married, so Jon was not a bastard. I think the evidence of such a marriage is fairly strong -- and I thought you agreed that a wedding of some kind likely occurred. And even if the wedding was "secret" there were people who were there -- perhaps JonCon among others -- who are still alive. So if Jon is revealed as the son of Lyanna -- and then others come forward as witnesses to the wedding (Ned might not even know exactly who was a witness), Jon as the legit son of Rhaegar could become an issue. So this situation is the one that I really think Ned was forced to confront -- not one where Ned could be sure he could pass Jon off as the bastard son of Rhaegar if he had wanted to do so.

But the main point is that being worried about Robert killing Jon or being worried about others, like the Lannisters, killing Jon is just too fine a line for me to distinguish. Ned understood that Jon's life could be in danger if the truth got out (whether the "real" truth or the variation where Jon is passed off as Rhaegar's bastard). Maybe from Robert -- maybe only from others -- not really that important a distinction -- Ned had good reason to fear for Jon's safety if the the identity of his parents became known -- so Ned kept the truth a secret.

Just to state the obvious for a moment.

There is little doubt in my mind that Jon is the true-born son of Rhaegar Targaryen, born of a true love union between Ice and Fire.

The most honourable and important action in Ned Stark's life -- and probably the central dilemma that created the whole saga in GRRM's mind -- was his decision to obey his beloved sister's promise to protect her son -- even if the existence of that son undermined the entire war they were fighting by perpetuating the Targaryens and undermining the Baratheons, and in a sense betrayed both the Starks and even, in a sense, his wife Catelyn. 

Ned took on all that damage to make that promise to Lyanna, and lived the lie that Jon was his bastard, out of no self-interest, but pure love for his sister.

Leaving aside Targaryen incest, Jon is the ultimate King of Westeros, with both the blood of the First Men and the Targaryen line in his veins, after having been no one and a bastard.

The symmetry with Tyrion's story is beautiful.

Unlike LOTR, it won't be ballyhooed from the parapets that Jon is the true king -- the significance for Jon is mental. He will see the nobility of what Ned did, and lose or redirect all his existential angst and bitterness.  Ned will always be his father, not just because he raised him, but because he will always be Jon's spiritual father.

The symmetry with Tyrion is this: Jon truly becomes himself when he realises he is not a bastard but rather a true-born product of love.  Tyrion will truly become himself when he realises he is not a true-born Lannister but rather a Hill probably begotten by rape upon his mother, transcending in his own way his history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

@UnmaskedLurker

I guess I am just convinced ;-).

Robert could always find out the truth. And if Ned believed he would then kill Jon he would never have been his friend but just a guy who feigned friendship all that time because you cannot really be friends with a guy who might murder your innocent nephew.

Ned doesn't understand the murder of children under any circumstances. Just look how he reacted to the plans to murder Daenerys or the prospect of being the guy responsible for Robert murdering his own children.

The problem I have with this idea that even a Targaryen bastard was a threat to Robert is the fact that there is no time or opportunity for Ned to develop such an opinion.

1. Robert never commanded the murder or any royal children, he just didn't punish Tywin and Jaime.

2. While Robert wasn't yet king he had not yet any dynastic reasons to kill all the Targaryens as he later might. There is no evidence that personally loathed Elia, the children, Prince Viserys, or Queen Rhaella.

3. A bastard simply has no dynastic importance whatsoever.

Sure, Ned could also have been afraid of his own shadow his entire life but how likely is that?

My argument is that Ned might have decided to raise the child as his bastard nephew if Lyanna and Rhaegar were not married, or that he might at least have revealed the truth to Catelyn and Jon if Lyanna and Rhaegar hadn't been married. There wouldn't have been much harm in that.

And this line of thought also works in a scenario of a super secret wedding because a super secret wedding is essentially no wedding at all. Ned could tell people whatever the hell he wanted if he controlled the information. He could have told Cat/Jon that Jon was Lyanna's bastard even if in truth was her legitimate son.

In fact, if he had poisoned the well is such a fashion no one would ever have believed that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married because anyone claiming that would go against the word of Eddard Stark.

But it seems he couldn't take that road at all because people might have known about that marriage (whatever validity it held in the eyes of the world). Not all that much in my opinion, but that is a separate issue entirely.

Thing is, Robert was always a hothead without a great deal of judgment.  When you add to that the red rag to Robert's bull -- that he loved Lyanna and wanted her -- then it is not a question of Robert being Ned's friend.  It is a question of a hotheaded King deprived of his now dead wife who has given birth to a rival claimant to the throne of his dead archenemy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, MtnLion said:

There is one person who can know without error, Bran, by observing through the weirwood-net.  

Great-- so the one person who can know without error has essentially no way of proving it to anybody else. 

8 hours ago, MtnLion said:

This is a time of honor, and making a claim (especially by a well known person of honor) would not be challenged without good cause. 

Are you serious?

A claim to the Iron Throne will be challanged on the flimsiest of circumstances by just about any of the other contenders. Dany, Stannis, the Tyrells, (f)Aegon, the Lannisters-- anybody. They don't give a shit about a claimants honor 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rhaegar the Disdained said:

A claim to the Iron Throne will be challanged on the flimsiest of circumstances by just about any of the other contenders. Dany, Stannis, the Tyrells, (f)Aegon, the Lannisters-- anybody. They don't give a shit about a claimants honor 

What makes you so sure any of these people will still be alive at the relevant time -- i.e., after the War for the Dawn 2.0, which is likely the time at which Jon might be considered to be King. Stannis will be dead, (f)Aegon will be dead, the Lannisters will all be dead and while not all the Tyrells will be dead, it is unclear what they might want at that point. I have no idea whether Dany will be alive or not -- but by that point she likely will be Jon's ally and not rival if she is alive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Jon actually leads/co-leads (with Dany) the War for the Dawn 2.0 and wins, he could be the butcher's boy and still be in line for the throne. It won't matter who his parents were.

The fact that he's the son of a reckless prince and starstruck 14 year old girl would probably be the weakest selling point of his claim at that point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Rhaegar the Disdained said:

If Jon actually leads/co-leads (with Dany) the War for the Dawn 2.0 and wins, he could be the butcher's boy and still be in line for the throne. It won't matter who his parents were.

The fact that he's the son of a reckless prince and starstruck 14 year old girl would probably be the weakest selling point of his claim at that point. 

I more or less agree. I just think that for some of the Lords, it will go down a bit easier if Jon is the true-born son of Rhaegar -- but being the hero of the war probably will be the main reason for the support for Jon -- if he become King in the end. I actually am not necessarily predicting it will happen -- I just think it is a possibility and if it happens, I think these will be the factors that make it happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

I more or less agree. I just think that for some of the Lords, it will go down a bit easier if Jon is the true-born son of Rhaegar -- but being the hero of the war probably will be the main reason for the support for Jon -- if he become King in the end. I actually am not necessarily predicting it will happen -- I just think it is a possibility and if it happens, I think these will be the factors that make it happen.

I agree with this

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/21/2016 at 11:06 AM, MtnLion said:

One needs to consider that if Jon were to find out, if he will make the claim.  No one needs to prove anything for Jon to make the claim, just as no one needs to prove that Daenerys is not a bastard, or is Rhaella's daughter.  (There is no one currently living that can testify to either.)  If there is a Great Council called to make a determination, it seems pretty obvious which way that will go.  In fact, Daenerys is foreshadowed as bowing low (painfully, as resisting causes her to suffer) to the hidden dragon, which of course would be Jon Targaryen (Snow). 

There is one person who can know without error, Bran, by observing through the weirwood-net.  Does that need to be done?  Not likely.  This is a time of honor, and making a claim (especially by a well known person of honor) would not be challenged without good cause. 

What? Ok is there some alt version to the story outside the show that I don't know about?

Jon does not need to prove a thing? Yes he does, if that was the case anyone can claim they are the king. That is ridiculous.

Comparing Jon to Dany. That's apples and oranges, Jon is not a known quantity, the world by and large excepts who Dany is. Your talking about a Silver Haired, purple eyed, magical dragon riding princess who is essentially the wonder of her age. To a guy who comes in second place to FAegon. Is anyone handing FAegon Westeros? They are trying to gain support for him, he has the Targaryen look he has people who knew Rhaegar claiming this is his son, he has Varys manipulating, gold, and an army and there are plenty of doubters.

Nobody doubts who Dany is, nobody even questions it. Even Robert didn't question her.

Bran is going to show everyone? What? Bran may tell Jon but convincing the rest of the world is a bit tougher.

A time of honor? What series are you reading? Your idea is Jon just says he is the king and they hand it to him, that's even beyond the GNC at least they a far fetched plan.

Without good cause? Nobody has a clue who Jon is, that is literally part of his story, how is that not good cause, he is a random stranger.

Dany bowing to a secret Dragon? What? Your comparing a walking talking super power that is taking over Essos, to a guy who needed help from Sam and Bloodraven to get elected LC of the Night's Watch. It wasn't honor they tricked the Night's Watch, and then later his honor got him stabbed by those same men because he kept getting them killed on rangings(Heads on spears), Hardhome a suicide mission, and then wanted to implicate the watch in a war with the Crown. Now you have Jon undying, getting up and saying hey I am the king the country is mine and everyone going oh, ok.

By your own logic and qualifiers FAegon should be king not Jon. He is a claimant who does not need to prove a thing and is Jon's older brother and legitimate because he says so. Jon Con Rhaegars dear friend says so and that is more support than Jon has. So what you are really saying is Aegon the king and Westrosi honor is going to give it to him the crown. Or are you saying Jon will try and steal the crown with his great honor from his older more Targaryen, legitmate, older brother? Because honor you know and no proof means Aegon.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 22.6.2016 at 5:25 AM, Rhaegar the Disdained said:

If Jon actually leads/co-leads (with Dany) the War for the Dawn 2.0 and wins, he could be the butcher's boy and still be in line for the throne. It won't matter who his parents were.

The fact that he's the son of a reckless prince and starstruck 14 year old girl would probably be the weakest selling point of his claim at that point. 

If Jon wasn't Rhaegar's son he would never co-lead the fight against the Others. And even if for some strange reason did I'm not sure that would necessarily make him a great king in peacetime. No commoner has ever ruled over Westeros or any of the Seven Kingdoms before.

If he wasn't of noble birth the lords would pat him on the back and give him a castle and some land, but they wouldn't hail him as their king. The whole NW background could actually have made a commoner a crucial figure in the fight against the Others but if that was the case such a person, even he had survived the entire Realm, would not rise to the throne. Realpolitik is way too strong for that in Westeros.

The political situation in the books demands that he is recognized as Rhaegar's son and adopted into the Targaryen family to have a shot at the throne or even to become an important leader in the fight against the Others. The Stark angle might bring whatever remains of the North, but that isn't much on the large scale of things.

@Ser Creighton

Any chance for Jon Snow to ever claim the crown on behalf of his birthright or something as ridiculously as that will be undone by Aegon's success. People might be willing to believe that a man with Valyrian looks is Prince Rhaegar's son, but nobody is going to a buy a story as ridiculous and silly as Jon Snow's - that another son of Rhaegar's looking nothing like him was raised by Eddard Stark as his own bastard son. Not after they had just a war between two Targaryen pretenders which Rhaegar's son is most likely going to lose. Who would want to back that undead horse yet again?

Jon Snow either marries Daenerys and rules at her side as her Prince Consort or he ends up on the throne as her anointed heir should she not survive the last battle. Any scenario in which Dany actually bends the knee to this Starkish looking boy of uncertain ancestry is completely ridiculous. She'll have conquered the known world by the time they meet, possibly even including Westeros itself, and thus Dany will rule by right of blood as much as by right of conquest.

Jon Snow has nothing to counter that. And one imagines that returning from the dead and possibly still depicting a lot of unhealed/ugly mortal wounds is not going to convince a majority of sane people that they should follow this dude. I mean, we don't even know whether zombies can father any children to continue the dynasty.

A Great Council ending would be completely anticlimactic in my opinion. If Jon Snow ends up on the throne then this can be accomplished in a smoother fashion by having him already as Dany's chosen heir/consort before the last battle. Not to mention that a Great Council would only be necessary if there were multiple claimants with good claims left at the end - which would be very unlikely indeed.

If you ask me I hope that Jon Snow is going to get his chance to die heroically in battle. He'll come back from the dead and that is not a good sign that he'll ever be in a shape to live happily ever after.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

@Ser Creighton

Any chance for Jon Snow to ever claim the crown on behalf of his birthright or something as ridiculously as that will be undone by Aegon's success. People might be willing to believe that a man with Valyrian looks is Prince Rhaegar's son, but nobody is going to a buy a story as ridiculous and silly as Jon Snow's - that another son of Rhaegar's looking nothing like him was raised by Eddard Stark as his own bastard son. Not after they had just a war between two Targaryen pretenders which Rhaegar's son is most likely going to lose. Who would want to back that undead horse yet again?

Jon Snow either marries Daenerys and rules at her side as her Prince Consort or he ends up on the throne as her anointed heir should she not survive the last battle. Any scenario in which Dany actually bends the knee to this Starkish looking boy of uncertain ancestry is completely ridiculous. She'll have conquered the known world by the time they meet, possibly even including Westeros itself, and thus Dany will rule by right of blood as much as by right of conquest.

Jon Snow has nothing to counter that. And one imagines that returning from the dead and possibly still depicting a lot of unhealed/ugly mortal wounds is not going to convince a majority of sane people that they should follow this dude. I mean, we don't even know whether zombies can father any children to continue the dynasty.

A Great Council ending would be completely anticlimactic in my opinion. If Jon Snow ends up on the throne then this can be accomplished in a smoother fashion by having him already as Dany's chosen heir/consort before the last battle. Not to mention that a Great Council would only be necessary if there were multiple claimants with good claims left at the end - which would be very unlikely indeed.

If you ask me I hope that Jon Snow is going to get his chance to die heroically in battle. He'll come back from the dead and that is not a good sign that he'll ever be in a shape to live happily ever after.

See that's how I feel about Aegon as well, he has an adverse effect on Jon not Dany. Dany flies in a on a Dragon, that's it, it's over. Nobody is going to go well maybe this one isn't a real Targaryen. "Dracarys" "Nope, Nope, shes real, sorry about that you majesty."

Agree with the second paragraph for the most part as well. Though Jon could be a king in the north as well by the time Dany arrives. That takes care of a good deal of foreshadowing. And it's nothing against Jon, it's just about being in two different positions, and they are in very different positions. I think Dany takes Westeros bellow the neck, the North will probably be a disaster by then. I mean it's bad now but I think it gets worse. Dany is a conqueror, even with a blood claim, she marches to the beat of her own drum. She acts as an agent of change. Women can't rule. Sure they can. Women can't conquer. Beg to differ. There are no more Dragons. Give her a minute. You have to be a Crone. No I think she wants to lead the Dothraki. Slavery is a way of life in Essos. Not anymore. A women can't rule Westeros. Yeah that's not going to hold up. You essentially have the wonder of her age, the breaker of rules. I can't do it is not part of her vocabulary.

I don't know that Jon returns from the dead, I have not seen anything of that nature. Anywhere, like on TV or something, is there a show about the books or something?

Difference between Jon and Dany, the same, but different. Sort of like the sun and the moon. (Shameless plug). If there was a show it would never do things like that. If they did they would be the coolest ever. If this was show related it gives no hint at a plot and would just be a side by side picture like someone could use in an avatar and we have so many show related avatars of two actors.

 

I think Jon goes out like a Dire wolf, an unking would be weird, though maybe he has a kid with someone who knows how that works, especially if you deal with a magic princess. That said there is this Night's King, Jon and Dany thing going on that I need to fully put down on the boards. It deals with parallels, inversions and transformations. But they are all tied together kind of like Robert, Rhaegar and Lyanna.

Also Dany pretty much has Tyrion, she just needs to shoot him at her enemies, his plot armor will destroy all in his path.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

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