Jump to content

Archived

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

Werthead

The Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon Thread, Part II

Recommended Posts

Due to the first thread becoming gargantunormous, it has now been shut down and this new one has been set up to continue the debate. The old thread can still be found at this location, but will no longer be stickied:

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?showt...mp;#entry548424

Let the debate begin anew!

A few basic rules:

This topic draws a lot of passionate debate. It's our, "Who killed Asmodean?" mystery, except that the answer is likely to be highly relevant to the outcome of the novels. Please respect your fellow posters' opinion. Debate is encouraged, flaming and spamming is not. Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Werthead. That thread was almost an entire message board in it's own right. Well, I feel like having some lively debate, so let's put some fuel on the fire.

An important arguement in R+L=J is that Lyanna's child is undoubtedly important to the series. I agree. What's also emphasized by many is that a character of such importance should have significant screen time in the series. I differ on that opinion, but let's carry that thought to an interesting conclusion.

One of the most famous characters in the series is Arthur Dayne. Has his role been particularly important? Not really. No more than Gerald Hightower or the Martell in the Kingsguard or even Barristan the Bold. But the title the Sword of the Morning is very iconic and famous. Also, in a great struggle named the War for the Dawn, you think the sword, Dawn, might play some importance. If Dawn is important, ergo, the Sword of Morning is important.

So, it seems logical that whoever is the Sword of Morning will play a vitale role in the series. I don't think many will argue that point, but you never know :D.

Now, this is very interesting. In AGOT and ACOK there is not one logical candidate for the Sword of Morning. Notta. No one. Zip. Nil. Zero. Why is there no viable option, when he should be such an important character. He's going to have songs written about him. He needs a backstory. Well, it is a long series :cool: . Martin still has plenty of time to bring him to the forefront.

ASOS comes out. YEAH! Finally! This awesome character will show up. We get one Dayne. Edric. He seems like a respectable chap. He could grow up to be the Sword of Morning one day. Well, that is a problem ain't it. He's ten, or maybe eleven, I forget. With the five year gap, he'd be about 15 in ADWD. I guess you could be the sword of morning at 15. Unfortunately, that didn't work out on Martin's part. Unless time starts traveling really quickly and the Others delay until he's a good choice, he won't reach that age until the end of the series. So, we need another candidate.

Ahhh, AFFC. We have chapters in Dorne! Awesome. Now, we're sure to get a candidate. Darkstar!!! Yeah! He can wield sword. Oh wait. He already gots a title. Damn. He tries to murder a little girl in cold blood. Damn. Damn. Well, too bad, he was too pretentious to be the Sword of Morning anyway.

Maybe in the fifth book our savior will show up ... :)

Yeah, I'm long winded, but here's my arguement. The Sword of Morning is a perfect example, where an extremely important character has not shown up by the fourth book of a seven book series, which is the half way point.

If the Sword of Morning has not shown up, why is it wrong that Lyanna's child hasn't appeared either? Many posters feel it's an outrage that a character of such magnitude hasn't been hinted to the reader. We have an obvious candidate for Lyanna's child, so it must work. Hmm. Perhaps, it's backwards. Perhaps, the Sword of the Morning has been around all along. Perhaps it's Lyanna's child who hasn't made his dramatic appearance yet. :cool:

Do I got any takers?

Artanaro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it established that the "Sword of the Morning" is a title that gets passed down? I kinda thought it was just Arthur Dayne's nickname, like how Gerold Hightower was the "White Bull", or how Brynden Tully is the "Blackfish", or countless other examples.

This point requires the assumption that the "mystery" of who is the next "sword of the morning" (if there will be one, which I don't think is firmly established) will be of similar import to the series as the mystery of Jon Snow's identity, or of what exactly happened at the ToJ. Is there any actual text to support this?

The fact that Arthur Dayne was "famous", in your words (whether you mean, in the world of Westeros, or as a fan favorite among readers, I don't know, but I don't think it matters), does not necessarily equate to his importance in the series.

I don't see how the continuation of House Dayne is all that earthshatteringly important to the series. The whole train of logic is very thin. Sure, he plays his own part, and his role could certainly expand, but I seriously doubt it will be any larger than that of some of the characters that were introduced in the Dorne chapters of AFFC.

This meta-reasoning is treacherous territory anyway. I've raised a similar objection to your theories, (about a future book bringing the revelation that Ashara is alive, out of the blue, IIRC), but it was a minor one, more to the point of, to resolve a mystery that is central to the series by introducing a character, who's fate (just about) everyone thought was resolved, and with no substantive setup whatsoever, would constitute sloppy writing on GRRM's part, a veritable jumping of the shark for the series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is it established that the "Sword of the Morning" is a title that gets passed down? I kinda thought it was just Arthur Dayne's nickname, like how Gerold Hightower was the "White Bull", or how Brynden Tully is the "Blackfish", or countless other examples.

So spake Martin

What happened to Ser Arthur Dayne's sword Dawn after Ned brought it back to Ashara?

Dawn remains at Starfall, until another Sword of the Morning shall arise.

So spake Martin

[Note: Having solicited questions to ask GRRM, Jasper says he asked only one, concerning whether Sword of the Morning was a familial office or a unique epithet for Ser Arthur Dayne.]

GRRM: "There have been other Swords of the Morning."

I'm fairly convinced I've seen other reference where Martin said the title and the sword were taken by the best knight of his generation.

This being said, I am not convinced that everything that hasn't been dwelt on will become extremely important at one point or another, the amount of "important" things would be starringly high at the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is it established that the "Sword of the Morning" is a title that gets passed down?

Yep, definitive proof. House Dayne decides who it is from among their number (how hasn't been explained), the candidate must be worthy, and there is not one at present.

Is there any actual text to support this?

It seems that a sword called Dawn would play a role in the "long night." Also, there's been mention of the sword of morning in every book, which means Martin has kept the notion on the surface.

The fact that Arthur Dayne was "famous", in your words ... does not necessarily equate to his importance in the series.

I said his role wasn't important. Based on his actions, his role is no more important than the rest of Aerys' Kingsguard except for Jaime.

I don't see how the continuation of House Dayne is all that earthshatteringly important to the series.

It has nothing to do with the continuation of House Dayne. That already happened with Edric Dayne being alive. There is a title given much emphasis that doesn't have a keeper. That signifies importance.

This meta-reasoning is treacherous territory anyway.

This isn't proof against R+L=J. It's a response to the arguement that an important character should have screen time. Based on how Westeros regards the position and the connection between the names "dawn" (the sword), the "long night" (war with the others), and the "sword of morning" (resolution of night) makes the reasoning quite sound. Anyways, if you don't agree that the sword of morning will be important, than none of this applies to you. If someone does though, and they believe in R+L=J, and they use the arguement that Lyanna's child should be on screen, then this reasoning applies to them.

Artanaro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the Sword of the Morning is very important. Dawn appears to be a sword like any other, without any special powers. It's not Lightbringer. Arthur Dayne was the Sword of the Morning and he didn't even know the Others existed. As you said yourself, his role hasn't been particularly important. Why would the next Sword of the Morning be important?

On the other hand, the prince that was promised, his is the song of ice and fire... It is much more exclusive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think the Sword of the Morning is very important. Dawn appears to be a sword like any other, without any special powers. It's not Lightbringer. Arthur Dayne was the Sword of the Morning and he didn't even know the Others existed. As you said yourself, his role hasn't been particularly important. Why would the next Sword of the Morning be important?

I regret saying Arthur Dayne was unimportant now. :) . Let me clean up that mess. He's actually one of the most important characters in the series. He is Jaime's paradigm for knighthood. He is the icon who Jaime wanted to be and represents his conscience, as seen by his fever dream. Arthur's character (if only how Jaime's sees him) determines boy Lannister's view of what's right and wrong in many regards. If Jaime's redemption is important, than so is Arthur Dayne. Also, he is among the best characters for providing literary foils and context to inside Westeros, so Martin seems to find him very important. He's considered the best knight EVER. That's important. We are given lots and lots of pages of exposition and background information on him. He a listed reason why Ashara Dayne commits suicide. He is Rhaegar's good (maybe best) friend. Without a doubt he's important. His role compared to other characters has had less an impact on Westeros' current players though. That's the basis for my comment.

On the other hand, the prince that was promised, his is the song of ice and fire... It is much more exclusive.

Even in that case, you are most likely wrong if you are referring to the revelation on Lyanna's child. It is most obvious that Jon is in no way the PwwP. That is Dany, as evidenced by dragons. Even if Jon is a head of the dragon, he is not the pwwp.

Personally, I don't like using story evidence to ever prove a point. All story evidence is rationalizing an opinion without taking an objective look at facts. But I find it interesting that the arguement, "important characters need screen time," is selectively used. The Sword of Morning will be an important character, or all the discussion about Arthur Dayne has been to no purpose.

Artanaro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I regret saying Arthur Dayne was unimportant now. :) . Let me clean up that mess. He's actually one of the most important characters in the series.

You must be kidding. There are all the Starks, the Lannisters, the Baratheons, the Cleganes, Doran, Oberyn, and Arianne Martell, the Greyjoys, Margaery and Loras Tyrell, Melisandre, Davos, Sam, Dany, Viserys, Aemon, Aerys, Rhaegar, Qyburn, Pycelle, Varys, Littlefinger, the male Mormonts, Ashara Dayne, Beric Dondarrion, Thoros, Brienne and many other characters that were much more important than Arthur Dayne to the story so far.

He is Jaime's paradigm for knighthood.

And this is his main contribution to the story. He's important as an influence for Jaime, not by himself.

Without a doubt he's important.

He's dead and people rarely think about him. Even Jaime worries a lot more about Aerys, Lancel, Osmund Kettleblack, and Moon Boy for all we know.

Even in that case, you are most likely wrong if you are referring to the revelation on Lyanna's child. It is most obvious that Jon is in no way the PwwP. That is Dany, as evidenced by dragons. Even if Jon is a head of the dragon, he is not the pwwp.

It's not obvious. The song of ice and fire fits Jon the best if R + L = J. It's really hard to know who is going to be the hero, because literary tradition has it that the prophesized hero with mysterious parentage starts as an ordinary guy until he meets an old mentor and gets trained by him, then he discovers his special powers and defeats the dark lord. In ASoIaF, Jon is the ordinary guy with mysterious parentage, but it's Bran who discovers his special powers and is going to get trained, while Dany is the prophesized hero with dragons. It's not clear and I'm sure this is how Martin intended it to be.

Personally, I don't like using story evidence to ever prove a point. All story evidence is rationalizing an opinion without taking an objective look at facts. But I find it interesting that the arguement, "important characters need screen time," is selectively used. The Sword of Morning will be an important character, or all the discussion about Arthur Dayne has been to no purpose.

Arthur Dayne has had very little screen time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You must be kidding. There are all the Starks, the Lannisters, the Baratheons, the Cleganes, Doran, Oberyn, and Arianne Martell, the Greyjoys, Margaery and Loras Tyrell, Melisandre, Davos, Sam, Dany, Viserys, Aemon, Aerys, Rhaegar, Qyburn, Pycelle, Varys, Littlefinger, the male Mormonts, Ashara Dayne, Beric Dondarrion, Thoros, Brienne and many other characters that were much more important than Arthur Dayne to the story so far.

It depends on how big you determine your sample set is for "most important characters" :P. But on this list, you are definitely wrong concerning Qyburn, male Mormonts (unless some things change), Oberyn (what has he done other than die, Dorne would still hate the Lannisters without his death), Arianne (hmm, she tried to start a revolt and fails miserablly, that's not the same as destroying the Kingswood Brotherhood). I'd put him above Loras Tyrell even. He kills some southern knights. Big Deal. Shrink your list, many others don't deserve being alongside the greatest knight ever :) .

And this is his main contribution to the story. He's important as an influence for Jaime, not by himself.

This doesn't make him less important.

He's dead and people rarely think about him. Even Jaime worries a lot more about Aerys, Lancel, Osmund Kettleblack, and Moon Boy for all we know.

Ned thought about him. Jaime thinks about him. Those were the only players left alive from Robert's rebellion. No one thinks about Lyanna, so does that make her not important? This reasoning doesn't hold up. Also, of your examples, all except for Aerys is wrong :-). I can list you the page counts for Jaime's thoughts on Arthur. They far surpass his thoughts on Lancel, Osmund, or Moon Boy. They might surpass them combined even. I'll break out my numbers, but you show me yours first. :D

It's not obvious. The song of ice and fire fits Jon the best if R + L = J. It's really hard to know who is going to be the hero, because literary tradition has it that the prophesized hero with mysterious parentage starts as an ordinary guy until he meets an old mentor and gets trained by him, then he discovers his special powers and defeats the dark lord.

It is more than obvious based on those who know about the prophecy, but I got one thread jac going. I'm not going to make it two.

Artanaro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shrink your list, many others don't deserve being alongside the greatest knight ever :) .

We don't know if he was the greatest knight ever. It would be very difficult to say that he was better than Aemon the Dragonknight or even Sandor Clegane. Other characters weren't as great as him but their clumsy actions had a lot more impact on the story than Arthur's prowess.

Ned thought about him. Jaime thinks about him. Those were the only players left alive from Robert's rebellion. No one thinks about Lyanna, so does that make her not important?

Ned thinks about Lyanna at least ten times more than he thinks about Arthur Dayne ("promise me, Ned") and Jaime thinks about Aerys at least ten times more than he thinks about Arthur Dayne.

This reasoning doesn't hold up. Also, of your examples, all except for Aerys is wrong :-). I can list you the page counts for Jaime's thoughts on Arthur. They far surpass his thoughts on Lancel, Osmund, or Moon Boy. They might surpass them combined even. I'll break out my numbers, but you show me yours first. :D

I don't have an electronic edition of AFfC, so it's a little hard to count how many times Jaime thinks about Lancel, Osmund and Moon Boy. On the other hand, AGoT + ACoK + ASoS have 36 results for "Dayne" versus 158 for "Aerys." "Lancel" has 73 and "Kettleblack," 63. "Lyanna" has 42. More accurate statistics is beyond my patience. :P

If you have AFfC in PDF format, please get the results and add them to my numbers. Oh, and my "Dayne" numbers are for Ashara, Arthur and Edric combined.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm on my re-read of ASOS and got to Mira's story about the Tourny at Herenhal (sp). I've seen very little posted about how Rheagar sung a song so beautiful it made Lyanna cry (to which Brandon made fun of her and she pourd wine over his head) and how Rheagar won the tourny and then name's Lyanna the Queen of ???? and beauty. I'm a math major and still can see that there is something going on between them.

Question I have about the story:

Was Rheagars wife at the tourny? I think so, but not 100% sure.

Is the purple eye's beauty that Ned dances with Ashara Dayne and why everyone links the two?

Reed is not usually talked about being a good knight, but if he is the laughing tree knight he was one of the best at the time, even if he was small in stature. One reason the 7 beat the 3 at the ToJ.

How old are the Starks in this story? How old is Rober for that matter (is he the storm lord?)? And was he betrothed to Lyanna at this point?

Who is the Knight of Skulls? (just wondering on that one)

The seen just made me think that R+L did run away and get married....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Question I have about the story:

Was Rheagars wife at the tourny? I think so, but not 100% sure.

Is the purple eye's beauty that Ned dances with Ashara Dayne and why everyone links the two?

Reed is not usually talked about being a good knight, but if he is the laughing tree knight he was one of the best at the time, even if he was small in stature. One reason the 7 beat the 3 at the ToJ.

How old are the Starks in this story? How old is Rober for that matter (is he the storm lord?)? And was he betrothed to Lyanna at this point?

Who is the Knight of Skulls? (just wondering on that one)

The seen just made me think that R+L did run away and get married....

Yes.

Yes.

It is by no means certain Reed was the KotLT. IMO it was Lyanna, Rhaegar found out, and that is why he gave her the crown and she later ran off with him. Also the knights the KotLT beat were not especially famous, so the KotLT did not need to be that good necessarily.

Late teens/early twenties

A Ser Richard Lonmouth IIRC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes.

Yes.

It is by no means certain Reed was the KotLT. IMO it was Lyanna, Rhaegar found out, and that is why he gave her the crown and she later ran off with him. Also the knights the KotLT beat were not especially famous, so the KotLT did not need to be that good necessarily.

Late teens/early twenties

A Ser Richard Lonmouth IIRC.

Even I think that Lyanna was The KotLT. Rhaegar was ordered by Aerys to find out who the KotLT is, seems to me he did and thats why he crowned her later. If she run off or not... don't know.

For the idea Jon as Dayne-decendend works fine for me. Would explain why the Daynes have the same story for Jon birth. If Jon is Rhaegar son why should they give a coverstory?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If Jon is Rhaegar son why should they give a coverstory?

Two possible reasons:

a) Robert is likely to want any child of Rhaegar dead, even if the mother was Lyanna (and remember that at this point Robert and Ned were estranged after a bitter quarrel about the morality of killing Targaryen children).

B) Targaryen loyalists, and simple opportunists of the LF type, are going to want to use Jon as a figurehead for their Game of Thrones plotting. Very likely this will lead to Jon's life being unhappy and short.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arthur Dayne was important in his day, but he isn't now. Some, like Jaime, still remember him, but that doesn't make him a player in the series "present." There is a connection between him and Lyanna since he was at ToJ (although we don't know that they had any interaction), but other than that I don't see what discussion of his character has to do with discussion of a child Lyanna and Rhaegar might have had.

Since this is supposed to be an R+L=J thread, let me begin by saying that Martin has left a lot of clues for this theory and none that support anything else; he would have some real fancy footwork to do if he intends to discredit what he's already written and come up with another explanation of Jon Snow's parentage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
et me begin by saying that Martin has left a lot of clues for this theory and none that support anything else

In pure R+L=J thread tradition, let me say that I respectfully disagree with this assertion.

From my point of view, you can easily explain everything with other theories, except the blue rose in the wall, which require a tad more mental gymnastics, but not really more than what's needed for R+L=J to work. You need to make assumptions anyway.

R+L=J is sort of all-encompassing so I can see the appeal, but I have been feeling more and more dismayed at how fanatic people can be about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We don't know if he was the greatest knight ever. It would be very difficult to say that he was better than Aemon the Dragonknight or even Sandor Clegane. Other characters weren't as great as him but their clumsy actions had a lot more impact on the story than Arthur's prowess.

A little exaggeration on my part, but actually, it's not hard to say he's better than Aemon and definitely better than Sandor. Simply look at a) Jaime's and others description of their fighting abilities. Arthur owned the Smiling Knight. He is without a doubt the best knight of his generation. Saying otherwise is wrong, based on all the comments in the series. Jaime has seen Sandor fight. He says Arthur is the best. Point proven.

Ned thinks about Lyanna at least ten times more than he thinks about Arthur Dayne ("promise me, Ned") and Jaime thinks about Aerys at least ten times more than he thinks about Arthur Dayne.

Ned's dead, baby. Ned's dead. :D Here is your comment in question that I was responding to.

He's dead and people rarely think about him. Even Jaime worries a lot more about Aerys, Lancel, Osmund Kettleblack, and Moon Boy for all we know.

So let's go over your our logic again. You said he's dead and people rarely think about him (not true, Jaime does all the time.) So I respond no one thinks about Lyanna (which is mostly true after AGOT. There are a few mentions of Rhaegar running off with the northern girl, etc or Ned's dead sister, but they are few and very rare. In any case, Jaime thinks about Arthur much more than anyone else does about Lyanna from this point onward). Now, you respond by saying Ned thinks about Lyanna ten times more than Arthur. That doesn't matter. If there are more references to Arthur in someone's thoughts then Lyanna, my point stands. And actually, in one book Jaime (ASOS) Jaime thinks more about Arthur than Ned does in all of AGOT. Therefore, if thoughts and references are all that matters, Arthur is more important than Lyanna. If you say someone does not play an important role because their action is not onscreen, then Lyanna is less important than Arthur. I don't agree with that, and neither should anyone, but that follows your logic.

I don't have an electronic edition of AFfC, so it's a little hard to count how many times Jaime thinks about Lancel, Osmund and Moon Boy. On the other hand, AGoT + ACoK + ASoS have 36 results for "Dayne" versus 158 for "Aerys."

You missed my point. It wasn't that Dayne is more prominent than Lancel, Kettleblack, or Moon boy in the series. It's that Jaime thinks about Arthur more then them. All you have to do is look at Jaime's chapters or chapters with Jaime and see a) where he talks about them and b)where they get mentioned in his thoughts. Simply using a word count does nothing. Arthur could be in his thoughts for pages, but his name may be mentioned three times. Jaime loved repeating Tyrion's words, so that would inflate Moonboy's count if he repeats them consecutively. I remember everytime Jaime mentioned Arthur (I'm very anal :D ), so I know who he thinks about more already, but knowing is not proving. And I did say "except for Aerys." Aerys does beat out Arthur, but I think Aerys is more important than him also.

Artanaro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
From my point of view, you can easily explain everything with other theories, except the blue rose in the wall, which require a tad more mental gymnastics, but not really more than what's needed for R+L=J to work. You need to make assumptions anyway.

I must say, I really enjoy reading your posts, Errant Bard. Let me go over a pet peave of mine, which relates to yours and Shewoman's comments. I have no problem with anyone believing any theory. If you think A+J=T, that's all good. If you think Ashara Dayne is a strange mystic out East in her spare time, that's an interesting thought. More power to you for defending that belief. But many R+L=J supporters form a unique group think that do one thing that just annoys me to no end :D . They introduce comments like this all the time.

Since this is supposed to be an R+L=J thread, let me begin by saying that Martin has left a lot of clues for this theory and none that support anything else;

This is tantamount to how "mob rule" works. If you have enough people saying that the opposition is wrong (or just something is true without stating reasons/facts), then that becomes evidence in the discussion by default. There is no basis for the previous point, but when people repeat it enough, they believe it and new people to the discussion believe it. Once someone already believes something strongly, nothing I say will ever receive an objective audience since in the back of their mind that clause is all that they use to support their assertion. THIS IS WRONG. Anyway, I don't care that much what other people think, so I'm good. Cheerio.

Artanaro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is tantamount to how "mob rule" works. If you have enough people saying that the opposition is wrong (or just something is true without stating reasons/facts), then that becomes evidence in the discussion by default. There is no basis for the previous point, but when people repeat it enough, they believe it and new people to the discussion believe it. Once someone already believes something strongly, nothing I say will ever receive an objective audience since in the back of their mind that clause is all that they use to support their assertion. THIS IS WRONG. Anyway, I don't care that much what other people think, so I'm good. Cheerio.

In the case of some people, you are probably correct here, but the generalization is egregious. There is a flip side to the coin: a tendency of yours to over-use this argument, to the point where people that show support for R+L=J, and who argue against your theories, are simply "sheep" who haven't "seen the light of your argument", even when it's the fallacies of your arguments that people are attacking directly. How do you expect to have a civilized discussion when your starting-off point in dealing with anyone that addresses your "arguments" is to assault them with taunts like "...and the sheep go baaaah!" After a while, that begins to sound less like argumentation and more like the fulfillment of a martyr complex.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A little exaggeration on my part, but actually, it's not hard to say he's better than Aemon and definitely better than Sandor. Simply look at a) Jaime's and others description of their fighting abilities. Arthur owned the Smiling Knight. He is without a doubt the best knight of his generation. Saying otherwise is wrong, based on all the comments in the series.

He must have been the best of his generation, but in an actual fight, I think a sober Sandor could have won, not sure about that.

Jaime has seen Sandor fight. He says Arthur is the best. Point proven.

I doubt Jaime would have admitted that anyone was better than Arthur Dayne (or himself). It's really hard to judge across several decades. Didn't you have a favorite food in your childhood, which was amazing, but when you proved it again as an adult, you realized it was not that great? But again Arthur Dayne might have been the best knight ever, but his actions didn't affect the story much. A lot of characters have achieved more with their little skills.

So let's go over your our logic again. You said he's dead and people rarely think about him (not true, Jaime does all the time.)

Do you really think that "all the time" is accurate? Or is it just another exageration?

I don't agree with that, and neither should anyone, but that follows your logic.

Lyanna isn't the most important character in the story either. Both are dead and Ned was the only one who thought often about Lyanna.

But Lyanna had mysterious death, we don't know for sure what she made Ned promise, but it was something that troubled Ned deeply. On the other hand, Arthur was a great knight and Jaime's role model. That's not mysterious. It's just not very interesting and there isn't much to say about Arthur Dayne. We want to find out about Lyanna and her love affair with the crown prince, which led to a war and the end of the Targaryen dinasty, rather than about Arthur Dayne's fight with an outlaw in the woods, sorry. Lyanna and Rhaegar had a much bigger impact.

You missed my point. It wasn't that Dayne is more prominent than Lancel, Kettleblack, or Moon boy in the series. It's that Jaime thinks about Arthur more then them.

An objective method for measuring the amount of a book character's thoughts hasn't been created yet, so we'll have to agree to disagree about this one. I've only read AFfC twice. When I read it again, I'll certainly pay more attention to Arthur Dayne's relative importance to the story. But in my current memory, he ranks very low.

Share this post


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

×