Is Jon and Dany's blood relationship supposed to be a problem?

[Apoplexy]

22 minutes ago, MinscS2 said:

If Jon and Dany break up because of this in season 8, I'll be pissed, because it makes absolutely no sense. You love who you love, and realizing that your partner is related to you in some way is not enough to kill those emotions.
 

I think it depends on how you view incest. If you are determinedly against it, it will affect your relationship and change the way you view your partner.

There was an episode of House md where house's married patients turn out to be half siblings. They were neighbors and it turned out that their parents had had an affair. The couple splits up at the end of the episode because the girl just cannot reconcile with the fact that they are related, but the boy still wants them to be together. 

The characters in the show make the same arguments made in this thread, not knowing you are related is way worse than knowing so and still getting into a relationship. But in the end, the girl decides to end the marriage. Her emotions towards the boy don't suddenly change, but she doesn't think she be with the boy after knowing he is her half brother. I wouldn't judge her decision either ways, because it comes down to how each individual personally feels.

[Blackwater Revenant]

52 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

I think I never read yours, anyway, as far as I can recall.

Listen, I must apologize as that remark was uncalled for, it's just that I've read many of the arguments you've had with other members of the forum, and strongly disagree with your interpretation of the text, and don't find your approach with others to my taste. But that was an unnecessary low blow on my part. I am sorry for that.

[StepStark]

6 hours ago, Newstar said:

Yes, it's always a good idea to ignore inconvenient facts that completely invalidate your attempted argument. That always works, LOL.

And if I may ask, how does the initial draft prove your point? If I remember correct, the end of the draft was never revealed, so it could be that the incestuous relationship ended disastrously.

And also, you really didn't answer @Blackwater Revenant's point: So what if incest is prominent in ASOIAF? Many things are prominent in ASOIAF, but that doesn't mean GRRM advocates all of them.

You really seem to have a very numerical approach to the books, which is both strange and wrong, When you make arguments as you make, it's only fair that people will question your understanding of the books, or whether you read them at all.

[Lord Varys]

39 minutes ago, Apoplexy said:

I think it depends on how you view incest. If you are determinedly against it, it will affect your relationship and change the way you view your partner.

There was an episode of House md where house's married patients turn out to be half siblings. They were neighbors and it turned out that their parents had had an affair. The couple splits up at the end of the episode because the girl just cannot reconcile with the fact that they are related, but the boy still wants them to be together. 

The characters in the show make the same arguments made in this thread, not knowing you are related is way worse than knowing so and still getting into a relationship. But in the end, the girl decides to end the marriage. Her emotions towards the boy don't suddenly change, but she doesn't think she be with the boy after knowing he is her half brother. I wouldn't judge her decision either ways, because it comes down to how each individual personally feels.

I think I dimly recall that episode, but this whole thing really is only a controversial issue where people really have deep-seated issues over the incest taboo. After all, incest is not just 'wrong' in many cultures but also an actual criminal offense that can be punished quite harshly. Although I guess no sane state is going to prosecute your for 'unintentional incestuous sexual relations' - but they would if you continue the affair.

In Germany we actually had such a case in this guy. And just recently there was a story in the media about a couple in the US who learned at the doctor's where they went because they had issues conceiving children that they were, in fact, twin siblings. I doubt Dany-Jon will ever go down that route. They live in a society and are descended from bloodlines where aunt-nephew matches - and even closer incest - isn't really seen as a problem. The chances that they will face any pressure from their environment to not continue their relationship is about zero.

[Lord Varys]

26 minutes ago, Blackwater Revenant said:

Listen, I must apologize as that remark was uncalled for, it's just that I've read many of the arguments you've had with other members of the forum, and strongly disagree with your interpretation of the text, and don't find your approach with others to my taste. But that was an unnecessary low blow on my part. I am sorry for that.

I was really just expressing the fact that I really didn't read anything you wrote up to that point. However, if you like to present any arguments on any subject you disagree with me - be my guest. This is a discussion board and not a social media echo chamber. We actually discuss issues here.

And occasionally even I change my mind... ;-).

8 minutes ago, StepStark said:

And if I may ask, how does the initial draft prove your point? If I remember correct, the end of the draft was never revealed, so it could be that the incestuous relationship ended disastrously.

What we know from the initial draft is that Jon Snow and Arya Stark are supposed to develop an romantic and sexual passion for each other but they can't be together because that would be incest. But apparently the story would have been that they still fall in love with each other despite the fact that they spent their formative years together.

In the end, they would have gotten together once the truth was out that Jon Snow was not, in fact, Arya's half-brother.

That means George was actually setting Jon-Arya to become another Jaime-Cersei. They would have been an incestuous couple who actually are into each other knowing fully well that they are brother and sister.

I, personally, don't find that an interesting or very convincing story. I have my issues with Jaime-Cersei, too, because on average twins don't love each other, and we never get any good back story or explanation for the gestation of their love. They just love each other and see each other as their other half. But how did that feeling develop? There are some hints here and there but nothing digging into that in depth.

The overwhelming majority of the Targaryen incest are arranged marriages. The people involved might love their spouses as siblings or other close family, but very few of them should have been romantically drawn to each other. The only such unions where love played a part would have been Aegon-Rhaenys, Jaehaerys-Alysanne, Rhaenyra-Daemon, Brynden-Shiera, and Jaehaerys-Shaera. Many of the others either weren't particularly close or really didn't like each other all that much.

That should be much more common in those arranged incest marriages just as it is in normal arranged marriage. And one really wonders how much historical figures like Aegon-Rhaenys or Jaehaerys-Alysanne really desired each other as individuals or to what degree they just enacted the fiction and fantasy that those Targaryen incest matches - based on the emotional bonds between siblings - were also genuine stories of romantic love?

[StepStark]

3 hours ago, MinscS2 said:

A lot of people who don't like Jon and Danys relationship brush away the "they didn't know"-argument without a second thought, all while screaming "Incest!", but the fact that they don't know makes all the difference.

It makes a difference - until they find out. After that, sorry but no, it doesn't make a difference any more. Or else you could justify Jaime/Cersei the same way: when they were kids, they didn't know what they're doing is wrong.

I don't think a lot of posters here understand how serious incest is, and how strongly the human society had to fight against it. Psychology states that strong social contempt for incest is necessary, because without it the attraction between people with same or similar genes would be overwhelming. People are naturally attracted to their relatives, and that is why family and society have to teach us right from the infancy that incest is bad and unacceptable.

So it isn't unnatural that Dany and Jon would be attracted to each other - though I doubt that D&D ever gave a serious thought about it. But it would be horrific if they find out they're related and decide to continue the romance. That's not something I'd put beyond D&D, but I'm pretty certain that in the books incest will not end up as something recommended by the author, not even under "special circumstances" like between Dany and Jon.

[StepStark]

6 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

In the end, they would have gotten together once the truth was out that Jon Snow was not, in fact, Arya's half-brother.

I don't think that we know this. I think it was just "fans" reading into it. Can you provide the source?

[StepStark]

8 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

I have my issues with Jaime-Cersei, too, because on average twins don't love each other, and we never get any good back story or explanation for the gestation of their love. They just love each other and see each other as their other half. But how did that feeling develop? There are some hints here and there but nothing digging into that in depth.

As I said above, it's the opposite. Twins would be attracted to each other more often than not, if not for the social norms that are imposed on them as early as possible. I have quite a few male-female twins around me and they all tell the same: practically the first thing they were taught as kids was that incest is bad. Not necessarily in words, but practically, like for example parents were quick to find some outside "girlfriend" for the brother and some outside "boyfriend" for the sister. Anything just to distract them from one another.

If GRRM is aware of this, and he probably is given how thorough he is in his researches, then it's not about how did the feeling between Jaime and Cersei develop, but who failed in the responsibility to stop it.

[Apoplexy]

13 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

 I doubt Dany-Jon will ever go down that route. They live in a society and are descended from bloodlines where aunt-nephew matches - and even closer incest - isn't really seen as a problem. The chances that they will face any pressure from their environment to not continue their relationship is about zero.

I agree, Jon and Dany probably won't face pressure from people around them about relationship. But it might give Jon pause to learn that Dany is his aunt. I know it's relatively common in westeros to marry first cousins, but I don't it will be a complete non-issue. 

[Lord Varys]

6 minutes ago, StepStark said:

As I said above, it's the opposite. Twins would be attracted to each other more often than not, if not for the social norms that are imposed on them as early as possible. I have quite a few male-female twins around me and they all tell the same: practically the first thing they were taught as kids was that incest is bad. Not necessarily in words, but practically, like for example parents were quick to find some outside "girlfriend" for the brother and some outside "boyfriend" for the sister. Anything just to distract them from one another.

If GRRM is aware of this, and he probably is given how thorough he is in his researches, then it's not about how did the feeling between Jaime and Cersei develop, but who failed in the responsibility to stop it.

Well, what I've read on the topic on twin studies don't seem to support that whole thing. But then, there are not that many studies in that topic at all.

That parents may fear their twins do stuff sounds reasonably plausible - the question actually is how many of them actually feel the need to do. Apparently 10-20% of people - according to one study - have incestuous erotic experiences during their lives, so this isn't exactly something that doesn't happen. People just don't talk about that all that much.

Whether it is something that happens often with twins or not I don't know. Could very well be.

However, my criticism about the Jaime-Cersei thing is just that we don't really get a feeling how this thing developed and evolved. It clearly started as innocent playing - they first played at sex before Tyrion was born in 273 AC, which means they would have been 6-7 years old at that time. Hardly the age in which you can *really* play at sex or really understand what you are doing there.

There real erotic and romantic desire for each other must have come with puberty. And George has yet to elaborate on that part of their story - assuming he intends to investigate this at all.

26 minutes ago, StepStark said:

I don't think that we know this. I think it was just "fans" reading into it. Can you provide the source?

Well, you can read the text of the original outline for yourself. It is quite clear:

Quote

Arya will be more forgiving [for Jon and Benjen's decision to not lend aid to the help of her, Catelyn, and Bran who seek refuge at the Wall after Winterfell is destroyed] ... until she realizes, with terror, that she has fallen in love with Jon, who is not only her half-brother but also a man of the Night's Watch, sworn to celibacy. Their passion will continue to torment Jon and Arya throughout the trilogy, until the secret of Jon's true parentage is finally revealed in the last book.

That is pretty explicit if you ask me. Jon and Arya are madly in love and the revelation of Jon's true parentage - whatever that was supposed to be at that time - is going to save their relationship.

[Lord Varys]

26 minutes ago, Apoplexy said:

I agree, Jon and Dany probably won't face pressure from people around them about relationship. But it might give Jon pause to learn that Dany is his aunt. I know it's relatively common in westeros to marry first cousins, but I don't it will be a complete non-issue. 

Not a complete non-issue, but ask yourself - in light of the show and the book characters - what is going to shake Jon more? That he is very much in love with his aunt? Or that he is a Targaryen prince by birth and has been lied to by his adoptive father/uncle?

It is quite obvious that the latter is the more important issue, especially in light of the show development where Jon is also supposed to be 'the rightful heir to the throne' - never mind that people in this series only care about claims when it is convenient and ignore them when they want to, without any consistency.

[StepStark]

21 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

That is pretty explicit if you ask me. Jon and Arya are madly in love and the revelation of Jon's true parentage - whatever that was supposed to be at that time - is going to save their relationship.

It is far from conclusive. It hints that Arya isn't tormented any more after the reveal of Jon's parentage, but it says nothing about Jon's take on it. And it does take two for tango. Not to mention that, even if Jon's also relieved as Arya is, it doesn't mean that their love ends happily and that is what GRRM intended to advocate.

Sorry, but as I said, that's just fans reading into it as this point.

[Lord Varys]

3 minutes ago, StepStark said:

It is far from conclusive. It hints that Arya isn't tormented any more after the reveal of Jon's parentage, but it says nothing about Jon's take on it. And it does take two for tango. Not to mention that, even if Jon's also relieved as Arya is, it doesn't mean that their love ends happily and that is what GRRM intended to advocate.

Sorry, but as I said, that's just fans reading into it as this point.

Well, who here said anything about any love ending happily in the very end? We don't get to the final ending of the story. But it is quite clear that Arya and Jon are no longer going to be tormented by their love after the revelation - perhaps Tyrion (whose love for Arya was unrequited in that scenario) was supposed to kill Jon and/or Arya in the end? Or the Others kill one of them. We don't really know.

But the point that the incest thing is supposed to go away as a main obstacle in the Jon-Arya relationship.

[StepStark]

6 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Well, who here said anything about any love ending happily in the very end? We don't get to the final ending of the story. But it is quite clear that Arya and Jon are no longer going to be tormented by their love after the revelation - perhaps Tyrion (whose love for Arya was unrequited in that scenario) was supposed to kill Jon and/or Arya in the end? Or the Others kill one of them. We don't really know.

But the point that the incest thing is supposed to go away as a main obstacle in the Jon-Arya relationship.

But it says nothing about Jon, or about them being together. It only hints that Arya wouldn't be tormented any more. Nothing else.

Just to remind you, this is what you said:

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

In the end, they would have gotten together once the truth was out that Jon Snow was not, in fact, Arya's half-brother.

If you compare that to the original outline that you quoted, you'll see a big difference.

[LucyMormont]

After reading the 10 pages on this thread, it seems to me that the overall positions are
1) Incest is a very bad thing, aunt-nephew romantic/sexual relationship is incest; they should be severely troubled by it and, either they will end it or it will be doomed by circumstances outside them.
2) Incest is a bad thing, but aunt-nephiew is not viewed as incest. So, they'll go on after the initial shock.

I am mostly in the 2) position, but my problem with 1) is not that they disagree, my main problem  is basically that its proponents want this series to become some sort of Aesop's Fable, that teaches the reader/viewer about right and wrong, and to lecture the audience in the direction of their particular mindset/point of view. Geez, this is a fantasy world, and a fictional story! WHY would anyone want that?? I certainly do not want that, I am perfectly happy with a fictional world with its own rules, mindset and worldview.
That's why, while I am a fervent opponent to the death penalty and certainly would not admire anybody who defends it in real life, and I strongly feel nothing but disgust for a person who administers a lethal dose to another human being (however impersonal the process), still Ned Stark is my favorite character of this whole series, and mi admiration for him does not diminish because he beheads people considered criminals in that worldview. And while I abhor real war, real murders, real beheadings, rapes, backstabbing, treason, etc., (most of those things far, far worse than real-life incest); I can sit and somehow enjoy watching a gorgeous fake dragon torching a bunch of fictional people  or a well filmed battle secuence. I have not seen any of those in real life, but sure as hell I would not like them a little bit.
But hey, to each his own.

[falcotron]

1 hour ago, LucyMormont said:

I am mostly in the 2) position, but my problem with 1) is not that they disagree, my main problem  is basically that its proponents want this series to become some sort of Aesop's Fable

I was talking with a friend of mine about this, and I think I understand it now. Incest is one of the things that triggers moral feelings of disgust, rather than outrage, like having sex with a pig vs. betraying a friend, and it's actually harder for us to think about them rationally than the outrageous things.

She actually abandoned her religion over this. She was raised in the Philippines, where cousin sex counts as incest, then went to school in Saudi Arabia, where it doesn't. She was so disgusted she went to her imam to ask why so many Arabs are so shameless and immoral when Islam has such strong provisions against incest. He showed her that the provisions in the Koran are all explicitly about siblings and lineal descendants, and that Muhammad himself had married a cousin, so as far as God was concerned, she was wrong, and her neighbors were not committing incest or doing anything else wrong. So she decided God was wrong, became an atheist,* and moved to Denmark.

And yes, when she learned that Ned's parents were cousins, her initial reaction was to lose respect for the Stark family and to start thinking Westeros needs to be fixed. Fortunately, ASoIaF is more important to her than something as trivial as her childhood religion, so she's been able to get over it and realize that we're supposed to see the Starks in a positive light while still rejecting the Lannister twincest as incest, but it wasn't easy for her.

---

* As an aside, one of the first things she did when she became an atheist is buy and eat some bacon. I've heard similar things from other Muslims, and Jews. Weird that our culture can make us think cousin sex is as disgusting as sibling sex, or not disgusting at all, but it can't make us think eating pigs is as disgusting as eating worms. At most, it can make us feel guilty for wanting to eat bacon, which isn't at all the same thing.

[Ser Quork]

7 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

<>.

But the point that the incest thing is supposed to go away as a main obstacle in the Jon-Arya relationship.

It goes away because in that scenario it ceases to be incest if they are cousins (in Westeros) rather than brother and sister. It's such a strange example to use and just doesn't work as an example for Jon-Dany as their show situation is the complete opposite of that example - they have gone from being (in their view) completely unrelated to the third degree of consanguinity as aunt and nephew.  I'll be amazed if it isn't an issue.

.

[Graydon Hicks]

and cousin incest was also a very real thing in our own european history. it was often used to make sure properties and wealth stayed within the control of a family. but cousin was the closest acceptable form of incest.

[Lord Varys]

10 hours ago, StepStark said:

But it says nothing about Jon, or about them being together. It only hints that Arya wouldn't be tormented any more. Nothing else.

Just to remind you, this is what you said:

If you compare that to the original outline that you quoted, you'll see a big difference.

Nay, it says that 'their passion - meaning Jon's and Arya's - will torment them throughout the trilogy' until the true parentage is revealed. You don't read the text.

I referred to the end of the story as far as we know it. Not the end of the story. And for that the revelation of Jon's true parentage was supposed to come as a relief. But we don't know whether Jon or Arya were supposed to survive the final climax, and neither do we know now.

2 hours ago, Ser Quork said:

It goes away because in that scenario it ceases to be incest if they are cousins (in Westeros) rather than brother and sister. It's such a strange example to use and just doesn't work as an example for Jon-Dany as their show situation is the complete opposite of that example - they have gone from being (in their view) completely unrelated to the third degree of consanguinity as aunt and nephew.  I'll be amazed if it isn't an issue.

That wasn't my point. My point was that George originally had a story in mind where two people who were raised as half-siblings actually fell in love with each other and apparently strongly desired each other sexually. That means he actually set up a clichéd standard incest love story. Now things are reversed - assuming the books do the Dany-Jon romance in a similar sequence, with Jon only learning who he actually is after he has fallen in love with Daenerys -, we are getting the love first before the incest door is opened. Which isn't really opened all that wide since it is an avuncular thing not a sibling or parent-children thing.

2 hours ago, Graydon Hicks said:

and cousin incest was also a very real thing in our own european history. it was often used to make sure properties and wealth stayed within the control of a family. but cousin was the closest acceptable form of incest.

Actually, avuncular marriages were also possible, simply not that common. Usually all the incestuous unions that are not forbidden/criminal offenses are also marriages you can get permission by the various governments. That means avuncular marriages would, on average, be technically legal in quite a few countries indeed. This doesn't mean many people do it all that often.

The whole canon law thing was mostly a way of the Papacy to collect money from royalty and nobility. The average peasant wouldn't necessarily have known whether his future wife was a third cousin or not. I mean, you need to know not only your family tree but also the other children of your various (great-)great-grandparents and their descendants. A rather tedious business if you ask about cousins through the female line.

5 hours ago, falcotron said:

I was talking with a friend of mine about this, and I think I understand it now. Incest is one of the things that triggers moral feelings of disgust, rather than outrage, like having sex with a pig vs. betraying a friend, and it's actually harder for us to think about them rationally than the outrageous things.

She actually abandoned her religion over this. She was raised in the Philippines, where cousin sex counts as incest, then went to school in Saudi Arabia, where it doesn't. She was so disgusted she went to her imam to ask why so many Arabs are so shameless and immoral when Islam has such strong provisions against incest. He showed her that the provisions in the Koran are all explicitly about siblings and lineal descendants, and that Muhammad himself had married a cousin, so as far as God was concerned, she was wrong, and her neighbors were not committing incest or doing anything else wrong. So she decided God was wrong, became an atheist,* and moved to Denmark.

This is actually a funny story considering that it shows that the whole incest thing is much more cultural than religiously motivated - although religion certainly serves as a means to enshrine customs like that. From what I know cousin marriages are also effectively the norm in certain regions of Pakistan - but then they include the relations of a (former) wife into the incest thing. Obviously things on the Philippines are different - which actually can have to do with the fact that they is a predominantly Catholic country.

That really shows that the whole incest taboo thing doesn't has a rational basis in the cultures it exist but simply wants to condemn 'improper behavior' between family members. It really hinges on the definition of family.

Emotionally in-laws can be as close or even closer than actual blood relatives, just as adoptive or foster siblings or step-relations can.

But from a rational point of view - fearing a slightly higher risk for birth defects in children - there is no reason to not have sex with your mother-in-law or your daughter-in-law.

[StepStark]

6 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Nay, it says that 'their passion - meaning Jon's and Arya's - will torment them throughout the trilogy' until the true parentage is revealed. You don't read the text.

I referred to the end of the story as far as we know it. Not the end of the story. And for that the revelation of Jon's true parentage was supposed to come as a relief. But we don't know whether Jon or Arya were supposed to survive the final climax, and neither do we know now.

Yes, I indeed misinterpreted the text at one point, sorry about that. But still, it doesn't make the actual quote any more conclusive. Like, if they had romantic feelings for each other while they thought they're half-siblings, it is only logical that they're relieved once they find out they're "only" cousins. But we definitely don't know that "they would have gotten together", as you said in the post I reacted to. Not even in the end of story as far as we know it Jon and Arya "gotten together".