Heresy Project X+Y=J: Wrap up thread 4

[JNR]

4 hours ago, Kingmonkey said:

The answer to Jon's parentage has not yet been given in the books. If it had, we wouldn't be debating it. That is why we are dealing with probabilities, not certainties.

Quite wise of you to say so.

4 hours ago, Kingmonkey said:

If one view has been considered most plausible by the majority of people presented the evidence over years of debate, you'd need some significant external factor to explain how it could be implausible.

It's not very hard to find such things in the case of RLJ, because RLJ (while a good possibility) is just much less established in the first place than fans believe.

We simply do not know where either Rhaegar or Lyanna was in the month that Jon was apparently conceived (assuming he was born around the Sack).  Were they together?  Maybe.  Could be.

We can't even show they were on the same continent together at any time during the Rebellion.  That's quite a remarkable truth for many fans to digest.  (LmL once told me he could show they were together, and when I asked how, he said "At Harrenhal.")

We cannot show the two of them ever spoke to each other.  There is no physical evidence such as letters.  No eyewitnesses establishing a relationship.  No eyewitnesses given who saw Rhaegar abduct Lyanna.  It's a very popular notion in Westeros, granted, but it's based on... nothing, like "The world is flat," or "the sun goes around the world," which I'm sure most Westerosi believe too. 

We don't know if the belief has any real foundation.  Yandel calls it a "well-known tale" and that... well, it can be interpreted in various ways.

Jon resembling Rhaegar in no apparent physical way is a serious issue.  Whole threads have been dedicated to this one, and the best anyone can say is "it could have happened."  Well, yes, it's possible.   Sure it is.  But in these books, half-Targ boys tend to have a Targ trait or two.   They just do, Bloodraven's albinism being the obvious exception.

Picture yourself being a lawyer armed with such flimsy facts, trying to persuade a jury or judge that those two people must be a boy's parents.  Sure, it's possible.  But that is not good enough to justify the rock-solid certainty that so many (not you) exhibit and the subsequent mockery of others, who don't see it that way, that usually follows.  I tend to defend the mocked.

[WSmith84]

36 minutes ago, JNR said:

Deal, assuming that we're talking about Jon's biological parents in the books only.  (The show is a bizarre alternate reality I can't analyze with any confidence.)  Get back to me when TWOW is out, and if I've lost, we'll settle up.  Paypal is simplest.

Yes, books only. And Paypal, or whatever the best way is to pay for stuff in the year 2034.

[Kingmonkey]

4 hours ago, wolfmaid7 said:

The Lemon tree is not so dismissive as you believe.We had GRRM's ssm on the matter i think it was @Victarion Chainbreaker or the user with the parrot avatar that wrote George on this and i invite either of them to repost what was said.

The fundamental problem with the Lemon Tree issue that many fDany people don't seem to be able to get their heads around is that this is a memory of her childhood. Something she remembers from when she was a few years old. It has absolutely zero bearing on where and when she was BORN. It only has any bearing on where she was some years after she was born.

Even if we accept the hypothesis that Dany was in Dorne rather than Braavos some time around 288-290, how does that have the slightest impact on whether or not she was born in Dragonstone in 284? Why does it make it any less likely that her parents were Aerys and Rhaella?

 

4 hours ago, wolfmaid7 said:

Ygrain,you can't say at that point there was no proof.

Ygrain's right, there was no proof. That can be said conclusively. Even if you guessed the final outcome when you first saw Star Wars, there was still no proof or indeed no evidence whatsoever for that guess -- your guess was coincidental. I can say this with some authority for one simple reason -- when Star Wars was filmed, Lucas had not yet decided to make Darth Vader into Luke Skywalker's dad. 

The first draft of Empire Strikes Back has Luke meeting the ghost of his father, who Darth Vader killed. The two characters were only merged in the second draft.

4 hours ago, wolfmaid7 said:

What shocked me was Leia being his twin.That crap came out of nowhere.

Indeed that did come out of nowhere, and wasn't planned until after the second film. In fact the casting for the first film states that Luke was 18 and Leia was 16, making it pretty clear they weren't intended to be twins at that point. Luke did originally have a twin sister who wasn't Leia, but again the characters were merged later on.

George (Lucas) may share George (Martin)'s love of cutting characters hands off, but apparently not his love of incest.

4 hours ago, wolfmaid7 said:

Its the story his children know because it was probably talked about.You think Ned told his children that Rhaegar kidnapped and raped his sister? I know its a tough time but i doubt this is a topic Ned would discuss.I dn't think the kids were immuned to the rumour mill at Winterfell.

We don't need to know who told Ned's children what the story was. Your contention was that nobody acted as if Lyanna had been missing. Certainly whoever told Ned's children that story did.

4 hours ago, wolfmaid7 said:

Why would they be required to pass as newborns? Especially in a time where there was much turmoil and grieving who pays attention to that crap.

You don't have to be paying attention to spot that a toddler that's walking around and saying a few words isn't a new born baby. These aren't fine details, you're requiring everyone to fail to notice the blindingly obvious. It would be easier to have passed off toddler Jon Snow as toddler Jayne Snow than to pass off toddler Jon Snow as new-born Jon Snow.

Any theory that requires everyone to have failed to notice the blindingly obvious should immediately be considered deeply suspect.

4 hours ago, wolfmaid7 said:

So a babe can be anywhere from 0-4 in this story. So when Stannis arrives at DS and was told Darry left with Viserys and the babe she could have been anywhere from 0-4yrs old.

Then why do people think she'd just been born, during the storm? Hence being called Stormborn? Why does Ned think she's 13?

4 hours ago, wolfmaid7 said:

Ok I see your Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna proposal  as a link( which it really isn't) and raise you  Robert and Lyanna were engaged as a link.

Sorry, Rhaegar kidnapping Lyanna isn't a link between Rhaegar and Lyanna? That's just bizarre.

Yes, there's a connection between Robert and Lyanna, I'm not denying that. On the other hand, can you show any actual communication between Robert and Lyanna? Any evidence that they spent any time together? The only time we actually know there were in the same place at the same time is when they were at Harrenhal, when guess who Lyanna was paying attention to? I'll give you a clue, his name starts with R and ends with "haegar", not "obert".

4 hours ago, wolfmaid7 said:

Let's start with these simple statement first.You asked me to focus on the essays and what they propose,let's do that.

So Kingmonkey,show me that Rhaegar took Lyanna.Not what people say or think but show me that is true.

This is even more bizarre. Honestly, this is probably the most bizarre objection I've ever seen anyone make to RLJ. 

Show me that Lyanna was engaged to Robert. Not what people say or think, but show me that is true.

Show me that Lyanna ever even existed. Not what people say or think, but show me that is true.

Show me that Robert's Rebellion ever happened, or that the Targs ever sat on the Iron Throne. Not what people say or think, but show me that is true.

Rhaegar's abduction of Lyanna is standard accepted history, it's known by everyone and denied by nobody. Many of the characters think about it having happened. If you don't accept that as pretty solid evidence that it happened, you might as well throw the entire history of Westeros in the bin, because it's one of the most widely attested off-page events in the series. 

 

[Melifeather]

@wolfmaid7 said,

If you put his statement to Bran about Arthur almost killing him if not for Howland it kind of lends credence to that.

It is not confirmation that Ned fought Ser Arthur at the tower, only that they had met each other somewhere. It is just as possible that it played out as I suggested that Arthur saved Lyanna from Tywin's men and brought her to a place where Ned found her. Ned could have mistaken the situation and made a move against Arthur until Howland intervened. We don't know what Howland did, but maybe he vouched for Arthur?

[Kingmonkey]

27 minutes ago, JNR said:

It's not very hard to find such things in the case of RLJ, because RLJ (while a good possibility) is just much less established in the first place than fans believe.

If you were to say "than some fans believe" then we'd be in complete agreement.

27 minutes ago, JNR said:

We can't even show they were on the same continent together at any time during the Rebellion.  That's quite a remarkable truth for many fans to digest.  (LmL once told me he could show they were together, and when I asked how, he said "At Harrenhal.")

Very true. Now replace Rhaegar with any other character in the series, and you know what? We still can't show they were on the same continent.

We are dealing with likelihoods. Even most people who don't buy into RLJ consider it likely that Lyanna was Jon's mother. Thus when we are looking for a potential father, we should look at people who are likely to have been together at the right time. We cannot show for sure that Rhaegar was with Lyanna. However Rhaegar had just kidnapped her and had not yet shown up again. Thus we can say it's pretty likely that they were together. We can also say it's pretty likely that Arthur Dayne and Lyanna were in the same place at the same time. 

By contrast we can say that it's impossible that Brandon was with Lyanna at this time, so we can dismiss Brandon (unless we play some serious shenanigans with the timeline to change what exactly "at this time" means). We can say that it's unlikely that Robert or Howland or Benjen were with her at this time, which means that they cannot on this evidence be dismissed as possibilities, but we'd need to look for some pretty solid evidence elsewhere to consider them more probable candidates than Rhaegar or Arthur.

27 minutes ago, JNR said:

 No eyewitnesses given who saw Rhaegar abduct Lyanna.  It's a very popular notion in Westeros, granted, but it's based on... nothing, like "The world is flat," or "the sun goes around the world," which I'm sure most Westerosi believe too. 

You're mixing up what the reader does or doesn't know with what characters do or don't know. It would be true to say that we don't know what it's based on, but that doesn't mean that Ned, or Robert, or Brandon, or Yandel etc. didn't know what it's based on. When you say it's based on "nothing", you're only considering the evidence that we the readers have. Presumably Brandon didn't just randomly wake up one morning and to rush to King's Landing to demand Rhaegar's head based on nothing at all. 

27 minutes ago, JNR said:

Jon resembling Rhaegar in no apparent physical way is a serious issue.  Whole threads have been dedicated to this one, and the best anyone can say is "it could have happened."  Well, yes, it's possible.   Sure it is.  But in these books, half-Targ boys tend to have a Targ trait or two.   They just do, Bloodraven's albinism being the obvious exception.

How about Duncan Targaryen or Bittersteel? Or Baelor Breakspear? Or Daeron the Drunken? Or Orys Baratheon? Or Jacaerys, Lucerys or Joffrey Velaryon?

The only two firm instances we have of a Targ having children with a woman of Northern descent produced dark-haired, non-Targ looking children.

27 minutes ago, JNR said:

Picture yourself being a lawyer armed with such flimsy facts, trying to persuade a jury or judge that those two people must be a boy's parents.  Sure, it's possible.  But that is not good enough to justify the rock-solid certainty that so many (not you) exhibit and the subsequent mockery of others, who don't see it that way, that usually follows.  I tend to defend the mocked.

It wouldn't stand up in court, but that doesn't make it merely possible. Fiction is not innocent until proven guilty. RLJ is probable, but not proven.

That aside, I'm with you on this one. I'm all for defending the mocked. I've defended non-believers in the pinned RLJ threads here plenty. It happens there sometimes, and it really shouldn't. As it happens the only person on the ASOIAF boards who's X+Y=J opinions I have no time for at all is an RLJer, and for pretty much the reasons you're talking about. Nothing is certain until it's written, and there is scope for alternatives. People should not be mocked for having a different opinion -- well unless it's something truly stupid, like Hodor+Balerion=Jon. Then mock away.

I hope you're as quick to defend RLJ from mockery in places like Sable Hall, House of Black and White and Last Hearth? Because as you said, this works both ways and honestly, it's just as bad the other way too. 

 

[LynnS]

6 hours ago, Kingmonkey said:

 People should not be mocked for having a different opinion -- well unless it's something truly stupid, like Hodor+Balerion=Jon. Then mock away.

I'm not sure this is OK at anytime unless someone is being obnoxious and needs to be spanked and thrown in the trunk of your car.  We have the example of Trump's rhetoric to see how easily permission is given to behave in a way that is detrimental to the common good.   Communication is sometimes a messy business and latitude should be given when someone's Hodor+Balerion=Jon idea represents naivete rather than stupidity.   It's too easy to shoot from the mouth rather than hold one's tongue. 

[Melifeather]

IMO if you have to attack someone by saying something is stupid or some other insult, that's not an argument at all nor a defense. It just means you have no further evidence to support your position.

[Kingmonkey]

10 hours ago, LynnS said:

I'm not sure this is OK at anytime unless someone is being obnoxious and needs to be spanked and thrown in the trunk of your car.  We have the example of Trump's rhetoric to see how easily permission is given to behave in a way that is detrimental to the common good.   Communication is sometimes a messy business and latitude should be given when someone's Hodor+Balerion=Jon idea represents naivete rather than stupidity.   It's too easy to shoot from the mouth rather than hold one's tongue. 

 I intended H+B=J as a shorthand for the kind of thing that goes so far beyond naivete and into the realms of WTFery that such latitude need not be given. Other than that, I fully agree. It's always better to educate than denigrate, but only when education is actually possible.

6 hours ago, Feather Crystal said:

IMO if you have to attack someone by saying something is stupid or some other insult, that's not an argument at all nor a defense. It just means you have no further evidence to support your position.

Not necessarily. All opinions are not equal. An opinion can be so obviously wrong and require such a dedicated rejection of reality to hold that it's an insult to the people you're addressing to voice it and expect to be debated reasonably. Opinions are not owed respect simply because someone has that opinion, and sometimes counter-arguments are so obvious and plentiful that they're just not worth wasting time on.

There's nothing in this thread that I'd consider comes remotely close to that state, but such opinions certainly do exist.

[LynnS]

53 minutes ago, Kingmonkey said:

 I intended H+B=J as a shorthand for the kind of thing that goes so far beyond naivete and into the realms of WTFery that such latitude need not be given. Other than that, I fully agree. It's always better to educate than denigrate, but only when education is actually possible.

 At one time Ned + Ashara and/or Arthur + Lyanna were considered WTFery, so I'm not prepared to make a judgement about something that seems out in left field.  It's not necessary to educate someone.  Some people have taken the main highway and have already reached their destination.  Others are taking the side roads and the trip isn't over for them yet.    It's harmless.

[Kingmonkey]

3 hours ago, LynnS said:

 At one time Ned + Ashara and/or Arthur + Lyanna were considered WTFery, so I'm not prepared to make a judgement about something that seems out in left field.  

It would be WTFery to consider Ned + Ashara WTFery since it says Ned+Ashara in the books.

Can you honestly say there's no distance out in left field where you wouldn't make that kind of judgement? Arya+Moat Cailin=Jon? Jon+Jon=Jon? Batman+Giant Space Goat=Jon? Take my Hodor+Balerion as symbolising that. 

 

 

[LynnS]

Just now, Kingmonkey said:

It would be WTFery to consider Ned + Ashara WTFery since it says Ned+Ashara in the books.

Can you honestly say there's no distance out in left field where you wouldn't make that kind of judgement? Arya+Moat Cailin=Jon? Jon+Jon=Jon? Batman+Giant Space Goat=Jon? Take my Hodor+Balerion as symbolising that. 

 

 

Three years ago I offered Ned + Ashara as a possibility and I was schooled in an unfriendly way.  Very few people were even open to the idea. I'm sure some people thought it was far outfield as Batman + Giant Space Goat = Jon and didn't have any concern about saying so.  At this point; I can honestly say that it doesn't matter to me one way or the other.  As far as RLJ is concerned; I don't take in all the details anymore. On some level, I still want to be surprised, if only a little.  I'm hoping for a big surprise, but that's just me.   After waiting all this time; I'm looking for something, anything that's new and I'll bite on just about any cracked pot; because you never know where a conversation will end up even if the starting point is a little weak or far-fetched. 

[J. Stargaryen]

I just wanted to remind everybody that the vast majority of hardcore fans believe RLJ. Cheers.

[Little Scribe of Naath]

57 minutes ago, Kingmonkey said:

It would be WTFery to consider Ned + Ashara WTFery since it says Ned+Ashara in the books.

Can you honestly say there's no distance out in left field where you wouldn't make that kind of judgement? Arya+Moat Cailin=Jon? Jon+Jon=Jon? Batman+Giant Space Goat=Jon? Take my Hodor+Balerion as symbolising that. 

 

 

Renly + Loras =  Jon, of course  

[LynnS]

11 minutes ago, Little Scribe of Naath said:

Renly + Loras =  Jon, of course  

To clarify, I was actually talking about cracked pots in general rather than anything specific to X+Y=Jon or Y+Y=Jon.. 

[Ygrain]

On 14. 11. 2016 at 2:35 AM, Kingmonkey said:

Ygrain's right, there was no proof. That can be said conclusively. Even if you guessed the final outcome when you first saw Star Wars, there was still no proof or indeed no evidence whatsoever for that guess -- your guess was coincidental. I can say this with some authority for one simple reason -- when Star Wars was filmed, Lucas had not yet decided to make Darth Vader into Luke Skywalker's dad.

Thanks for the insight, good to know.

On 14. 11. 2016 at 2:35 AM, Kingmonkey said:

The first draft of Empire Strikes Back has Luke meeting the ghost of his father, who Darth Vader killed. The two characters were only merged in the second draft.

I wonder if the Starkiller meeting the ghost of his father killed by Vader is an accident, or a nod to this version of the story?

On 14. 11. 2016 at 2:35 AM, Kingmonkey said:

Indeed that did come out of nowhere, and wasn't planned until after the second film. In fact the casting for the first film states that Luke was 18 and Leia was 16, making it pretty clear they weren't intended to be twins at that point. Luke did originally have a twin sister who wasn't Leia, but again the characters were merged later on.

So the hints which, in retrospect, can be used as a validation of Leia being Luke's sister, were originally meant to point at something else?

On 14. 11. 2016 at 2:35 AM, Kingmonkey said:

George (Lucas) may share George (Martin)'s love of cutting characters hands off, but apparently not his love of incest

And apparently also chickens out when it comes to loves triangles. Han versus Luke would have been very Martinesque :-)

[Laughing Storm Reborn]

On 13/11/2016 at 5:20 PM, LynnS said:

 

I'll bet my entire hoard of Canadian Tire money that Martin attaches Schmobert's head to Clegane's body.  Any takers?

To me Ned is always going to be Jon's father, and i think to the character it's not going to be a dilema, Ned was his father...

That would be cool, Robert's head is some shocking twist, but it has to have a profound efect on one or two characters

Another issue, where does jon's abnormal strenght comes? "waking the dragon" is crap writing imo but who knows, so it's either a warg thing or parental genetics... Was lyanna so strong as for her son to yank a spear out of 3 meters of snow like yesterday's news? Hmm... Sure a guy can develop power but that was written to be a clue if ever i saw one

[Kingmonkey]

16 hours ago, LynnS said:

Three years ago I offered Ned + Ashara as a possibility and I was schooled in an unfriendly way.  Very few people were even open to the idea. I'm sure some people thought it was far outfield as Batman + Giant Space Goat = Jon and didn't have any concern about saying so. 

It's very obviously not as far outfield as Batman + Giant Space Goat. For a start the characters actually exist in the universe in question, which can be considered a minimum requirement for being Jon's parents. 

16 hours ago, LynnS said:

As far as RLJ is concerned; I don't take in all the details anymore. On some level, I still want to be surprised, if only a little.  I'm hoping for a big surprise, but that's just me.   After waiting all this time; I'm looking for something, anything that's new and I'll bite on just about any cracked pot; because you never know where a conversation will end up even if the starting point is a little weak or far-fetched. 

I think this is a rather interesting point, because you're far from alone. I'd say that the famous "George doesn't do simple" quote from his girlfriend comes from pretty much the same thinking.

GRRM likes complicated and often quite dark stories. When RLJ has been laid out to us for so many years, it's very easy to think that there must be something wrong with it. In its most simplistic, it comes across as a cheap fairytale story, and many people don't like that. I'm certainly one of those. I believe a lot of people who don't believe in RLJ are driven by a distrust in the notion that GRRM would be writing a simple fairytale, and this frequently comes out in the way people try to counter the theory. If you look at the challenges that are commonly made, they frequently fall into the more fairytale categories. For example the questioning of whether there's any actual evidence for Lyanna & Rhaegar being in love, which has come up more than once in this thread alone. 

My feeling is that this suspicion can be a trap for the unwary. When you combine the notion that "GRRM doesn't do simple" and that RLJ is a simple love story/hidden prince motif, it naturally makes any evidence for RLJ seem inherently suspicious. Two possible answers for this are:

1. RLJ is wrong.

2. RLJ isn't a simple love story/hidden prince motif.

It seems to me that a lot of people jump on answer 1 without thinking very hard about 2. If we remove "simple" from the RLJ equation, that inherent suspicion becomes a problem rather than a solution. This is why I approached the RLJ essay for this series by going very much back to basics. I avoided discussions of legitimacy, Jon as king-candidate, the Rhaegar/Lyanna love story etc. and simply looked for the evidence that pointed to Lyanna being Jon's mother and Rhaegar being Jon's father. There remains a lot of it. 

I think that looking at answer 2 is something that's been severely lacking in ASOIAF fandom compared to looking at answer 1. If we're not happy with the idea of RLJ as love story/hidden prince, what else might have been going on, when "George doesn't do simple", other than simply scrapping RLJ as a concept?

While RLJ has some things in common with these simple fairy-tale romances, it's a very long way from being one. Rhaegar and Lyanna do not live happily ever after. The ogrish husband-to-be that the maiden escapes from turns out to be the good guy and caves the handsome prince's chest in, while the maiden dies in childbirth, and everything turns to crap. GRRM is often considered the breaker of tropes, but a writer has to write a trope before they can stomp on it. I would suggest then that assuming RLJ will go down the fairytale path in the parts we can so far only speculate on is quite a mistake. 

This holds even if our starting point IS a love story. Romeo & Juliet is a tragedy not a romance -- but that doesn't mean that Romeo and Juliet didn't fall in love. There's no reason to believe that GRRM couldn't write a story involving lovers from

"...Two Noble Houses, both alike in dignity,
In fair Westeros, where we lay our scene,
From ancient grudge break to Robert's Rebellion,
Where civil blood makes civil hands unclean.
From forth the fatal loins of these two foes
A pair of wolf-blood'd lovers lose their life;
Whose misadventured piteous overthrows
Do with their death bury their parents' strife."

Anyone who thinks that Romeo & Juliet is a fairytale or that Shakespeare "did simple" doesn't know their Shakespeare.

Another way to look at it is to question what is hidden by what on the face of it looks like a love story. The hints of prophecy underlying our knowledge of Rhaegar potentially opens a huge can of worms. If we question why Rhaegar would have acted in a way which seems to have been incredibly negative for Westeros, should this make us question RLJ, or should we suspect that RLJ is just a lot more complicated than that simple love story?

Some of us have delved a little into the more extreme possibilities these question raise. I've suggested that the events echoes between the events at the toj and the events at MMD's tent/raising of dragons may have been intentional, and that Rhaegar was attempting to do something magical, and possibly rather dark. I think it's a fair bet that something similar was happening at Summerhall, and Duncan the Tall messed it up. If it turns out that Rhaegar had intended that he and Jon both die for example, wouldn't that sufficiently answer the "George doesn't do simple" trope-breaking requirement? Wouldn't that count as the kind of "big surprise" you're hoping to find?

I think it's partly the fault of a small number of the more enthusiastic RLJ supporters who've been quite vocal about a very clean version of RLJ that a number of the more thoughtful people around here really dislike RLJ. Because some have hammered home a fairly simplistic version of RLJ over the years, sometimes insisting on a One True RLJ reading, those suspicious of that One True Reading are pushed away from RLJ itself rather than that particular reading. It would be great if some of the energy that has gone into looking into alternatives to RLJ could be channelled into considering possibilities for a different story that doesn't need the evidence for RLJ purely as a question of parentage to be put aside. RLJ covers a vastly wider range of possibilities and outcomes than are generally considered.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[LynnS]

1 hour ago, Laughing Storm Reborn said:

To me Ned is always going to be Jon's father, and i think to the character it's not going to be a dilema, Ned was his father...

That would be cool, Robert's head is some shocking twist, but it has to have a profound efect on one or two characters

Another issue, where does jon's abnormal strenght comes? "waking the dragon" is crap writing imo but who knows, so it's either a warg thing or parental genetics... Was lyanna so strong as for her son to yank a spear out of 3 meters of snow like yesterday's news? Hmm... Sure a guy can develop power but that was written to be a clue if ever i saw one

Or maybe.... what happened Rob Stark's head again?  But I'm willing to add my stamp collection to sweeten the deal. 

[LynnS]

34 minutes ago, Kingmonkey said:

I think this is a rather interesting point, because you're far from alone. I'd say that the famous "George doesn't do simple" quote from his girlfriend comes from pretty much the same thinking.

That was a splendid piece of writing Kingmonkey.  One that I very much enjoyed reading.  I intend to tap you on another puzzle that I've been wondering about for a long time and just simply can't crack.  It may or may not have something to do with Lyanna's flight to who knows where.

The things Jaime does for love.... Here's the passage where Jaime is conducting a quid pro quo with Catelyn before she releases him into Brienne's custody:

A Clash of Kings - Catelyn VII

"Aerys . . ." Catelyn could taste bile at the back of her throat. The story was so hideous she suspected it had to be true. "Aerys was mad, the whole realm knew it, but if you would have me believe you slew him to avenge Brandon Stark . . ."

 

"I made no such claim. The Starks were nothing to me. I will say, I think it passing odd that I am loved by one for a kindness I never did, and reviled by so many for my finest act. At Robert's coronation, I was made to kneel at the royal feet beside Grand Maester Pycelle and Varys the eunuch, so that he might forgive us our crimes before he took us into his service. As for your Ned, he should have kissed the hand that slew Aerys, but he preferred to scorn the arse he found sitting on Robert's throne.

 I think Ned Stark loved Robert better than he ever loved his brother or his father . . . or even you, my lady. He was never unfaithful to Robert, was he?" Jaime gave a drunken laugh. "Come, Lady Stark, don't you find this all terribly amusing?"

*******

What is Jaime talking about?  Ned is the Stark who reviled him for killing Aerys.  Ned has no knowledge of Jaime's true motivations:

A Storm of Swords - Jaime V

To save the realm. "Did you know that my brother set the Blackwater Rush afire? Wildfire will burn on water. Aerys would have bathed in it if he'd dared. The Targaryens were all mad for fire." Jaime felt light-headed. It is the heat in here, the poison in my blood, the last of my fever. I am not myself. He eased himself down until the water reached his chin. "Soiled my white cloak . . . I wore my gold armor that day, but . . ."

"Gold armor?" Her voice sounded far off, faint.

He floated in heat, in memory. "After dancing griffins lost the Battle of the Bells, Aerys exiled him." Why am I telling this absurd ugly child? "He had finally realized that Robert was no mere outlaw lord to be crushed at whim, but the greatest threat House Targaryen had faced since Daemon Blackfyre. The king reminded Lewyn Martell gracelessly that he held Elia and sent him to take command of the ten thousand Dornishmen coming up the kingsroad. Jon Darry and Barristan Selmy rode to Stoney Sept to rally what they could of griffins' men, and Prince Rhaegar returned from the south and persuaded his father to swallow his pride and summon my father. But no raven returned from Casterly Rock, and that made the king even more afraid. He saw traitors everywhere, and Varys was always there to point out any he might have missed. So His Grace commanded his alchemists to place caches of wildfire all over King's Landing. Beneath Baelor's Sept and the hovels of Flea Bottom, under stables and storehouses, at all seven gates, even in the cellars of the Red Keep itself.

********

We have Jaime's word that the wasn't over the love of a woman; that Robert represented the greatest threat to House Targaryen that it had facd since the Blackfyre rebellion.  

But what or who is Jaime talking about when he says that he is loved by one Stark for a kindness he never did?  Considering the 'things he does for love are usually some manipulation of Cersei's.   What kindness?  The sort of kindness that falls into the category of killing Bran in his sleep because he's better off dead?

Here's Jaime discussing Arya after the confrontation with Joffrey:

A Feast for Crows - Jaime IV

The castle yard was full of eyes and ears. To escape them, they sought out Darry's godswood. There were no sparrows there, only trees bare and brooding, their black branches scratching at the sky. A mat of dead leaves crunched beneath their feet.

 

"Do you see that window, ser?" Jaime used a sword to point. "That was Raymun Darry's bedchamber. Where King Robert slept, on our return from Winterfell. Ned Stark's daughter had run off after her wolf savaged Joff, you'll recall. My sister wanted the girl to lose a hand. The old penalty, for striking one of the blood royal. Robert told her she was cruel and mad. They fought for half the night . . . well, Cersei fought, and Robert drank.

 Past midnight, the queen summoned me inside. The king was passed out snoring on the Myrish carpet. I asked my sister if she wanted me to carry him to bed. She told me I should carry her to bed, and shrugged out of her robe. I took her on Raymun Darry's bed after stepping over Robert. If His Grace had woken I would have killed him there and then. He would not have been the first king to die upon my sword . . . but you know that story, don't you?" He slashed at a tree branch, shearing it in half. "As I was fucking her, Cersei cried, 'I want.' I thought that she meant me, but it was the Stark girl that she wanted, maimed or dead." The things I do for love. "It was only by chance that Stark's own men found the girl before me. If I had come on her first . . ."

The pockmarks on Ser Ilyn's face were black holes in the torchlight, as dark as Jaime's soul. He made that clacking sound.

*********

In other words, if Jaime had come across Arya first; he would have killed her.  Ironically, Jaime does suffer the old penalty himself for striking someone of the royal blood.

So I wonder, was it Jaime who came across Lyanna when she ran off after Brandon savaged Petyr?  Sent by Cersei to find and kill her when it became known that she was missing.   Is this the kindness to Cersei that he didn't do and why there is a Stark who loves him for some reason.

*******

end of cracked pot

 

 

 

[ravenous reader]

1 hour ago, LynnS said:

A Clash of Kings - Catelyn VII

 

"Aerys . . ." Catelyn could taste bile at the back of her throat. The story was so hideous she suspected it had to be true. "Aerys was mad, the whole realm knew it, but if you would have me believe you slew him to avenge Brandon Stark . . ."

 

 

 

"I made no such claim. The Starks were nothing to me. I will say, I think it passing odd that I am loved by one for a kindness I never did, and reviled by so many for my finest act. At Robert's coronation, I was made to kneel at the royal feet beside Grand Maester Pycelle and Varys the eunuch, so that he might forgive us our crimes before he took us into his service. As for your Ned, he should have kissed the hand that slew Aerys, but he preferred to scorn the arse he found sitting on Robert's throne.

 

 I think Ned Stark loved Robert better than he ever loved his brother or his father . . . or even you, my lady. He was never unfaithful to Robert, was he?" Jaime gave a drunken laugh. "Come, Lady Stark, don't you find this all terribly amusing?"

I don't think the 'one' or the 'so many' (bolded in red) necessarily refers to Starks exclusively.  The lead-in to this remark proceeds from a discussion surrounding Jaime's motivation for killing Aerys, 'if you would have me believe you slew him to avenge...' so Jaime is thinking aloud here about his motivations surrounding the kingslaying which is basically the central act defining his existence.  Whenever he's physically pushed to the brink -- e.g. here sleep- and light-deprived, starved, and now inebriated in the Riverrun dungeons, or elsewhere mutilated, feverish and lightheaded in the Harrenhal bathtub -- Jaime becomes less circumspect and verbally disinhibited with whomever happens to be questioning him.  It's Jaime having a heart-to-heart with himself uncensored by italics -- pretty blistering truthtelling stuff for anyone happening to be listening in!  

The many who revile him refers more broadly than the Starks to the whole kingdom -- basically all those who decry him as a treacherous 'Kingslayer' and have deprived him with his name of his humanity. The one who loves him for the kindness he didn't do is his father Tywin.  Ironically, although it's stated over and over that he's his father's golden child, his father has likewise deprived him of his humanity, seeing him as little more than an instrument in the game he's playing for power.  Tragically, Jaime is intelligent enough to understand that Tywin like Cersei is not capable of loving anyone and any expression of apparent love, approval, gratitude or affection is contingent upon complying with Tywin and his agenda, primarily his all-consuming vendetta vs. his arch-nemesis Aerys.  Jaime has never been loved for himself but for how he can advance the ambitions of his father or his sister by his disembodied sword hand.  Therefore, the 'kindness he didn't do' which is equivalent to 'his finest act' -- one and the same  -- refers to Tywin's narcissistic assumption that Jaime was not acting on behalf of some higher noble purpose, or even for his own private purpose, when he slew Aerys, but in order to please him by avenging all the slights against the Lannisters that had accrued on account of Aerys!  The last order Aerys gave was for Jaime to bring him his father's head.  Instead, Jaime slew Aerys and the pyromancers (although I like to imagine he did unwittingly comply with Aerys's order in grand Oedipal fashion, being Aerys' biological son unbeknownst to him!).  

For Tywin, anyway, it would have been natural to conclude that Jaime had acted for love of his father -- choosing loyalty to House Lannister over his Kingsguard vows, which would've pleased Tywin, especially considering Jaime's appointment to the Kingsguard had been interpreted by Tywin as a malicious tit-for-tat attempt by Aerys to deprive him of his heir and steal his son for his own.  Jaime, however, seems to be implying that this wasn't the case -- that he wasn't acting out of love ('the things I do for love') in this particular instance, but out of duty as a knight.  I believe he's trying valiantly to convince himself that this is so -- although I don't quite believe him...  I think he's a romantic at heart, hoping against hope that one day Tywin, Cersei or Tyrion will return his favor, and the likeliest explanation is that he slew Aerys to protect his father and himself, so that it would not come to a confrontation with Tywin who had entered the city.