Jump to content
manchester_babe

Why do book readers hate R+L=J?

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Ygrain said:

Ned not paying a SINGLE guilty thought to either.

Yeah, that too.

I agree with the post above this: Jon being a bastard wasn't why Ned didn't want to bring him to King's Landing, that's just an excuse and quite the lame one at that. We even see a bastard sitting in the Small Council...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trying to disprove R+L=J is occasionally an amusing diversion, but that's the limit of it. I think many people just want to be the ones to "discover" something so profound as that was back before the internet spoiled everything. Then of course there are just the trolls. While Martin hasn't out and out said it in the novels, he's laid so many hints and foreshadowing to it, I don't think he could plausibly go back on it if he wanted to.

My only radical belief in this, is Jon's ancestry isn't destined to put him on the Iron Throne, but be the one destined to confront the Others. Even if Jon were to learn of his ancestry, a big if in of itself, what's he going to tell people? That his brother saw it in a tree vision? That he found some hidden note in his mom's tomb saying so? That a frog eating savage told him? There's too many people already too invested in other leaders to even care about that. I bet even Dany would question his ancestry and see him as a threat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Widow's Watch said:

What nailed it for me on the first read was Ned's brothel adventure.

The same for me - I can't claim a full realisation at that point yet, but reading his train of thought ending with Rhaegar, I went, wait, what?!  I devoured the rest of the book with a feeling that there was something I had missed in that rushed read, so I went back, more slowly, and put the bits together. There was no one crucial part for me, though, it was the excellent characterisation of Ned throughout the whole book, which allowed me to realise that he wouldn't be hurting Jon and Cat with his silence unless he had a very good reason - and that reason wouldn't be for himself but for another, just like he would lie to protect another but not himself. The people Ned protects and lies for are his family; Benjen or Brandon's child wouldn't need such a protection, but Lyanna's.... with this realisation, Ned's behaviour finally started to make sense, and so did the memory of Rhaegar post-brothel.

1 hour ago, Widow's Watch said:

Second read was this scene and Ned's thought process.

It starts with Ned remembering Rhaegar's infant son and the red ruin of his skull, to Robert's behavior both in the throne room and at Darry, to Sansa pleading (and we know she was pleading for Lady's life) to Lyanna pleading for ???

And Sansa's pleading was, "stop them, don't let them do it, she's innocent". Switch "she" for "he", and I believe we have why the scene reminded Ned of Lyanna.

1 hour ago, Widow's Watch said:

While Ned was worried about what Robert might do, I think he feared the Lannisters more with good reason. The bastard excuse was a lame one. 

I believe the grudge he harbors towards Tywin for the murder of Rhaegar's children is a subtle indication of this.

1 hour ago, Widow's Watch said:

Are there book gods we can pray to?

Try the nearest tree :D

 

4 minutes ago, Lord Lannister said:

My only radical belief in this, is Jon's ancestry isn't destined to put him on the Iron Throne, but be the one destined to confront the Others. Even if Jon were to learn of his ancestry, a big if in of itself, what's he going to tell people? That his brother saw it in a tree vision? That he found some hidden note in his mom's tomb saying so? That a frog eating savage told him? There's too many people already too invested in other leaders to even care about that. I bet even Dany would question his ancestry and see him as a threat.

There are the Daynes who may be in the know, at least to some extent.

But it is pretty much possible (and rather appealing) that while the various claimants squabble for the ugly chair, the true king will go and do what's necessary, alone and without glory. In the dark, where no-one will ever know, or see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ygrain said:

There are the Daynes who may be in the know, at least to some extent.

But it is pretty much possible (and rather appealing) that while the various claimants squabble for the ugly chair, the true king will go and do what's necessary, alone and without glory. In the dark, where no-one will ever know, or see.

I always thought the Daynes were pretty much there as a huge red herring for Jon's parentage. It was just dangled there as a well known fantasy trope to distract readers from thinking about R and L, complete with the magical sword that's just waiting for a claimant.

I think also think that's Jon's endgame as well, though I have the feeling that a certain Samwell Tarly, assuming he survives, will thoroughly document the king that should've been and that saved them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lord Lannister said:

I always thought the Daynes were pretty much there as a huge red herring for Jon's parentage. It was just dangled there as a well known fantasy trope to distract readers from thinking about R and L, complete with the magical sword that's just waiting for a claimant.

I believe you are right with the red herring (and, yeah, the magical sword waiting for the worthy one!), but still: Arthur Dayne was involved in the ToJ events and was Rhaegar's closest friend. How much of his insider knowledge did he confide to his family, or what might he have left with them for safekeeping? I can definitely see some options here, should GRRM go for some support of the reveal.

1 hour ago, Lord Lannister said:

I think also think that's Jon's endgame as well, though I have the feeling that a certain Samwell Tarly, assuming he survives, will thoroughly document the king that should've been and that saved them.

You're right, I completely forgot about Sam!  That would be an awesome role for him, provided that he doesn't get burnt for his heretical claims undermining the twue wuler Aegon/Dany/whoever.

And I like "the king that should've been", it has a ring to it that history likes.

BTW, are you familiar with Dragon Age:Origins game? It acknowledges AGOT as an inspiration, and its Jon parallel, Alistair, does have an option of an ultimate sacrifice as the most kingly act that one can do. I wonder if the authors might have second-guessed George.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ygrain said:

I believe you are right with the red herring (and, yeah, the magical sword waiting for the worthy one!), but still: Arthur Dayne was involved in the ToJ events and was Rhaegar's closest friend. How much of his insider knowledge did he confide to his family, or what might he have left with them for safekeeping? I can definitely see some options here, should GRRM go for some support of the reveal.

You're right, I completely forgot about Sam!  That would be an awesome role for him, provided that he doesn't get burnt for his heretical claims undermining the twue wuler Aegon/Dany/whoever.

And I like "the king that should've been", it has a ring to it that history likes.

BTW, are you familiar with Dragon Age:Origins game? It acknowledges AGOT as an inspiration, and its Jon parallel, Alistair, does have an option of an ultimate sacrifice as the most kingly act that one can do. I wonder if the authors might have second-guessed George.

Arthur certainly had to have known what was going on. Though he's out of the picture unless you believe in the crackpot theories floating around that he faked his death, he's Mance, etc. Ashara knowing is less likely, but possible. Though again, she removed herself from the equation as well with her suicide. Though it's possible she's Lemore, I suppose, she'd still be unavailable to reveal anything I'd expect. Ned Dayne seemed all too eager to reveal everything he knew to Arya, which seemed to be inaccurate information. So that lends to my belief there's nothing for the remaining Daynes to reveal.

Wow, that's something I didn't even consider. Sam being put to death for the heresy of spouting lies undermining the winners claims. Yet entirely possible given how many people in Westeros are willing to support rulers with inadequate claims(Joffrey, Renly, etc.) so long as it's in their interest. I think a pointless Sam execution would bother me more than the Red Wedding did. "The king that should've been" sounds like a good title for a book, came up with that completely by accident!

I've never played any of the Dragon Age games. From what I've been repeatedly told, they'd be right up my alley.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Lord Lannister said:

Arthur certainly had to have known what was going on. Though he's out of the picture unless you believe in the crackpot theories floating around that he faked his death, he's Mance, etc.

I don't :D

But I could see a document signed by Dayne and Whent as witnesses to Rhaegar's marriage to Lyanna, so Arthur could be speaking from his grave, so to say.

13 minutes ago, Lord Lannister said:

Ashara knowing is less likely, but possible. Though again, she removed herself from the equation as well with her suicide. Though it's possible she's Lemore, I suppose, she'd still be unavailable to reveal anything I'd expect.

I wholeheartedly hope that she is dead and stays dead, there are too many resurrections and fake deaths and identity switches around as it is.

13 minutes ago, Lord Lannister said:

Ned Dayne seemed all too eager to reveal everything he knew to Arya, which seemed to be inaccurate information. So that lends to my belief there's nothing for the remaining Daynes to reveal.

But what about the older generation? 

13 minutes ago, Lord Lannister said:

Wow, that's something I didn't even consider. Sam being put to death for the heresy of spouting lies undermining the winners claims. Yet entirely possible given how many people in Westeros are willing to support rulers with inadequate claims(Joffrey, Renly, etc.) so long as it's in their interest. I think a pointless Sam execution would bother me more than the Red Wedding did. "The king that should've been" sounds like a good title for a book, came up with that completely by accident!

Then it's good that GRRM doesn't read the forums, provided he hasn't planned this already :D

13 minutes ago, Lord Lannister said:

I've never played any of the Dragon Age games. From what I've been repeatedly told, they'd be right up my alley.

The first one I can definitely recommend, along with the expansion (Awakening). The rest... well, there are people who like them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, House Beaudreau said:

I think Edric's Story points mostly likely to Ashara Dayne being Jon's mother. the story in Starfall is Wylla is the mother to protect Ashara's honor. But the story in Winterfell is a big mystery with only rumors of Ashara. Ned getting Ashara pregnant at Harrenhal, and Ned takes his bastard home after the war, Depressed Ashara kills herself or long shot goes into hiding and is Quiathe or some other crazy theory.

I think this is a bit out there. If Jon is to pass of as close in age to Robb, he would have had to been conceived after Harrenhal (because Cat buys this idea that they fairly are close in age, even after seeing Jon as a baby)

It also wouldn't do anything to protect Ashara's honor, because it's common knowledge that she was- at the very- with child at some point. Turning that child from Ashara's to Wylla's doesn't change that she had one. It also doesn't make sense that Ned would take Ashara's child. Ned would have to go to Starfall to retrieve said child (and if Ashara doesn't want to give it up, who's going to take it), which would be fairly cruel if she wants to keep it (remember how Ned gave Cersei an out, Even though she was his enemy. Does he seem like the type to take a child from his mother).

12 hours ago, House Beaudreau said:

If Jon was Lyanna's or Brandon's why wouldn't he tell Cat that he is claiming Jon to protect him from Robert or any Targaryen Loyalist that would seek him out to put him on the throne? It seems like the biggest reason not to tell Cat is that Ashara is Jon's mother.

Catelyn was basically a stranger to him at this point. Later on, she had already made up her mind about Jon, and it's not very relevant to their life at this time.

As an aside, which would be worse/more suspicious: a bastard who is treated exactly like all his trueborn siblings, even by the woman who was supposedly shamed, or a bastard who is hated by his father's wife and is held at a distance from the rest of the family for the sake of propriety.

You can be the judge... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ygrain said:

I don't :D

But I could see a document signed by Dayne and Whent as witnesses to Rhaegar's marriage to Lyanna, so Arthur could be speaking from his grave, so to say.

I wholeheartedly hope that she is dead and stays dead, there are too many resurrections and fake deaths and identity switches around as it is.

But what about the older generation? 

Then it's good that GRRM doesn't read the forums, provided he hasn't planned this already :D

The first one I can definitely recommend, along with the expansion (Awakening). The rest... well, there are people who like them.

Seems to me if such a document existed, Ned would've gone out of his way to find the incriminating evidence and destroy it or at least secret it away. He seemed to take every other precaution, including not telling even his wife when a few hushed words would've bought him a lot of domestic bliss.

I think all the fake deaths and identity switches, just dials up the crackpot theories and makes it seem like there's more than there is around here. Though Catelyn's character was done a gross disservice with her resurrection. Though admittedly I'm an avid supporter of A+J=T, so there is that too.

What older generation of Daynes? The current lord of Starfall is what, ten? Though given they let him wonder around the Riverlands with a band of glorified criminals, with no protection, maybe that's why there aren't many Daynes left. Beyond Darkstar, who else has even been mentioned?

Martin would have to say that, regardless of if it's true or not. Though yeah, if he needs to steal ideas from me, if it gets the books done, let him. :P

Well games can be like books. You follow the whole series even after a few great ones, even if they've done way too many sequels, because you're invested in it. Sometimes the author will manage to recapture the magic further down the line though.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Lord Lannister said:

Seems to me if such a document existed, Ned would've gone out of his way to find the incriminating evidence and destroy it or at least secret it away. He seemed to take every other precaution, including not telling even his wife when a few hushed words would've bought him a lot of domestic bliss.

Provided he knew about its existence in the first place.

10 minutes ago, Lord Lannister said:

What older generation of Daynes? The current lord of Starfall is what, ten? Though given they let him wonder around the Riverlands with a band of glorified criminals, with no protection, maybe that's why there aren't many Daynes left. Beyond Darkstar, who else has even been mentioned?

Allyria, though she might be pretty young herself, given that she was Berric's betrothed. But her and Edric's mother is not stated as dead and there might be other living relatives who haven't been mentioned so far.

 

10 minutes ago, Lord Lannister said:

Well games can be like books. You follow the whole series even after a few great ones, even if they've done way too many sequels, because you're invested in it. Sometimes the author will manage to recapture the magic further down the line though.

I'm afraid DA2 successfully deinvested me, but I do love my Origins dearly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Lord Lannister said:

What older generation of Daynes? The current lord of Starfall is what, ten? Though given they let him wonder around the Riverlands with a band of glorified criminals, with no protection, maybe that's why there aren't many Daynes left. Beyond Darkstar, who else has even been mentioned?

A lot of the noble houses of Westeros have deep lineages and expansive branches. Look how easily the Karstarks came back from losing their lord and all his heirs.

We don't have much information about many of these houses, but that's mostly because they haven't come into contact with any of the POV characters. Darkstar is known to us because he was part of Arianne's plot. Edric is known to us because of Arya's POV. The rest are just sitting in Starfall/High Hermitage (presumably).

We also didn't know about the Tyrells until midway through A Storm of Swords. That doesn't mean he didn't exist. Only that he hadn't come into play yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Lord Lannister said:

Trying to disprove R+L=J is occasionally an amusing diversion, but that's the limit of it. I think many people just want to be the ones to "discover" something so profound as that was back before the internet spoiled everything. Then of course there are just the trolls. While Martin hasn't out and out said it in the novels, he's laid so many hints and foreshadowing to it, I don't think he could plausibly go back on it if he wanted to.

My only radical belief in this, is Jon's ancestry isn't destined to put him on the Iron Throne, but be the one destined to confront the Others. Even if Jon were to learn of his ancestry, a big if in of itself, what's he going to tell people? That his brother saw it in a tree vision? That he found some hidden note in his mom's tomb saying so? That a frog eating savage told him? There's too many people already too invested in other leaders to even care about that. I bet even Dany would question his ancestry and see him as a threat.

Agree with everything said here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Jon_Stargaryen said:

A lot of the noble houses of Westeros have deep lineages and expansive branches. Look how easily the Karstarks came back from losing their lord and all his heirs.

We don't have much information about many of these houses, but that's mostly because they haven't come into contact with any of the POV characters. Darkstar is known to us because he was part of Arianne's plot. Edric is known to us because of Arya's POV. The rest are just sitting in Starfall/High Hermitage (presumably).

We also didn't know about the Tyrells until midway through A Storm of Swords. That doesn't mean he didn't exist. Only that he hadn't come into play yet.

What do you mean? Like what exact situation are you referring to? Not by any means did the Karstarks "come back" after Eddard and Torrhen were killed during the battle in the whispering wood, nor did they do so after Rickard himself was executed. So how exactly did they come back?

 

BTW; Don't take this as a dispute, I'm legit curious as to what exactly you're referring to with the bolded, so I can go back and see how I'd skipped over a part like that.

Edited by RhaegoTheUnborn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

   Strange why no one said the real reason a lot of people hate R + L = J. The reason is very simple. A lot of clues points to that direction. A lot of mysteries are in there. Jon has already fought the undead. If this theory is true then with almost certainty Jon is the Prince who was Promised, the Savior, the Heir of Westeros. Obviously, people who dislike or hate Jon Snow or who love Daenerys Targaryen want Daenerys to the Savior. 

    If the theory is true then Daenerys won't be the Saviour, the PwwP. Daenerys lovers and Jon haters do not want that to happen...so they claim it to be too obvious, to mainstream to be true. They don't want it to be true because almost certainly if it is Jon the Prince who was Promised. And they cannot take it. Too much to them.

    I like Jon and hope it is true and he is the Saviour, however, if Danny is the one I will gladly accept it as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, HallowedMarcus said:

   Strange why no one said the real reason a lot of people hate R + L = J. The reason is very simple. A lot of clues points to that direction. A lot of mysteries are in there. Jon has already fought the undead. If this theory is true then with almost certainty Jon is the Prince who was Promised, the Savior, the Heir of Westeros. Obviously, people who dislike or hate Jon Snow or who love Daenerys Targaryen want Daenerys to the Savior. 

    If the theory is true then Daenerys won't be the Saviour, the PwwP. Daenerys lovers and Jon haters do not want that to happen...so they claim it to be too obvious, to mainstream to be true. They don't want it to be true because almost certainly if it is Jon the Prince who was Promised. And they cannot take it. Too much to them.

    I like Jon and hope it is true and he is the Saviour, however, if Danny is the one I will gladly accept it as well.

Anyone who thinks this story will have the "one true hero and saviour of the universe" is missing out on a whole lotta story, and they're in for a nice surprise. :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, RhaegoTheUnborn said:

What do you mean? Like what exact situation are you referring to? Not by any means did the Karstarks "come back" after Eddard and Torrhen were killed during the battle in the whispering wood, nor did they do so after Rickard himself was executed. So how exactly did they come back?

 

BTW; Don't take this as a dispute, I'm legit curious as to what exactly you're referring to with the bolded, so I can go back and see how I'd skipped over a part like that.

I'm talking about the other members/branches of House Karstark, i.e. Arnolf, Cregan and Cregan's sons.

Alys is the actual ruler, but Cregan attempted to usurp her/Harrion's position by marrying her into his line.

I'm mainly using them as an example of families with really deep benches, like the Tyrells and Lannisters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jon_Stargaryen said:

I'm talking about the other members/branches of House Karstark, i.e. Arnolf, Cregan and Cregan's sons.

Alys is the actual ruler, but Cregan attempted to usurp her/Harrion's position by marrying her into his line.

I'm mainly using them as an example of families with really deep benches, like the Tyrells and Lannisters.

 

Still don't quite get it, even with all of that, the Karstarks didn't really gain much prestige or recognition from either side. One can argue that with the deaths of Eddard & Torrhen followed by the death of Lord Rickard and him cursing House Stark, and the defection of the rest of the Karstarks, that the Karstacks never rose up, or  "came back" into their former state of power. And Alys isn't the rightful ruler, its still Harrion, Alys went on to marry a Thenn, thus creating a new noble house, and Alys could lay claim to Karhold as well should Harrion die. Rickard dies, Harrion becomes lord of Karstark, Arnolf conspires to put his son, Cregan in place as the new Lord Of Karhold, they conspire with the Lannisters to have Harrion killed, if my memory is correct, that never happened. They knew Cregan would be the Lord had he married Alys and they tried to force her into a loveless marriage to simply to benefit Cregan's plan to rise up into nobility.  Cregan is then imprisoned at Castle Black , after demanding Alys be returned. And thats that. So far there is no indication that Cregan himself had children nor Arnolf himself aside from Cregan & Arthor. Those "three grandsons" could just as much be Arthor's. But that isn't the point. I know you're just using the Karstarks as an example, but even with their ancient or the more recent branches to other Northern houses, the Karstarks are a disappointing shell of the House they used to be. So I dont think they ever "came back", which is why I'm having a hard time understanding how after the execution of Lord Rickard and his two sons, along with the imprisonment of Cregan and the failed plan to have Alys  named heir , only to marry Cregan, how did the Karstarks make a come back?

I haven't been reading much of the books lately, due to my love of comics nowadays. But did any other House leave alongside the the Karstarks, after the execution of Lord Rickard? Arnolf was never anyone important, he was castellan while Lord Karstark and his three sons were away at War.

Edited by RhaegoTheUnborn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/7/2018 at 8:00 PM, Jon_Stargaryen said:

I'm intrigued...:huh:

I think Robert and Lyanna are Jon's parents.

On 3/7/2018 at 7:55 PM, Jon_Stargaryen said:

You can say the mystery of Jon's parentage is far from settled- and I'm tempted to agree with you- but is it really far from settled. It's not conclusive, but it's not baseless either.

There aren't really any gaps that would contradict the theory. If you take all that we've been told from all of the characters and look at it objectively when asked, Who is Jon Snow's mother? chances are you'll get something similar to I don't know or Lyanna Stark.

It explains why the Kingsguard were at the Tower of Joy, why Wylla is said to have (at the very least) nursed Jon, why Ned Stark- who is seen by others to be laughably honorable- brought home a bastard, why Dany dream of a Blue flower growing from a wall of Ice she's never seen (which denotes information she shouldn't know), why Ned refuses to tell Jon or Catelyn of his mother (and only tells Robert at his insistence (Bobby B. don't care about propriety) and even why Ned never has a cruel thought or word about Rhaegar/the guy who supposedly raped and murdered his sister.

There's no other theory that checks all of those boxes. There are some that check many of them.

Two things:

  • We don't actually know what Ned is thinking in this conversation, because it's a Catelyn chapter (which, in and of itself is interesting/in keeping with keeping the mystery). All we know is what he says.
  • I doubt Dany would welcome Jon with open arms. He's a contender for her throne, and the Seven Kings. Though the books are showing her to be an ineffectual leader, so maybe. I have my doubts though. Dany has a specific type, which Jon doesn't really fit (her first husband was a rapist and murderer, and her second lover is a sociopath)
  • Lord Borrell and Edric can't both be right (unless the fisherman's daughter is Wylla)

  • It's not a dismissal. Ned having a bastard with a woman right before the war fits up with the timeline pretty well. There's just more evidence for R+L=J

Jon hasn't actually been confirmed as dead, and if he is, it has already been shown that Red Priests (sometimes) have healing and resurrection power. It also doesn't seem to rely on sacrifices.

Also, we don't know if Jon is truly a bastard. It should be noted that GRRM isn't particularly wasteful. As such, including a detail like Aegon's double marriage to his sister-wives and Maegor's multi marriage to his myriad wives would be fairly wasteful if it never came into play. Perhaps Jon is the son of Rhaegar's {second wife}. Also, Rhaegar could have silently set Elia aside, due to her barrenness.

I agree that his bastardry is important and shapes the character, but it doesn't mean he can't be trueborn. It just means that he would have a hard time adjusting to the lime-light. There is also a lot of precedent: Sansa is made into a bastard to keep her safe from the Lannisters, Young Griff is hidden as a sellsword's son. People hiding themselves or others as people of lower birth is fairly common. 

Baseless is a harsh word to characterize what the opposition to this theory have said. I don't deny why RLJ would be seen as the answer by many.

As to not having gaps that would contradict the theory ,that has been and is up for debate.IMO,there are several aspects of this theory that just don't stand up.What i'm about to say and point out is one of the major problems with RLJ IMO.

1.A person has to already believe the theory for the clues to make sense.

2. The theory IS the foundation  not the clues instead of the clues being the foundation of the theory.

E.g. What you posted as clues:

Quote

"It explains why the Kingsguard were at the Tower of Joy, why Wylla is said to have (at the very least) nursed Jon, why Ned Stark- who is seen by others to be laughably honorable- brought home a bastard, why Dany dream of a Blue flower growing from a wall of Ice she's never seen (which denotes information she shouldn't know), why Ned refuses to tell Jon or Catelyn of his mother (and only tells Robert at his insistence (Bobby B. don't care about propriety) and even why Ned never has a cruel thought or word about Rhaegar/the guy who supposedly raped and murdered his sister".

1.You assume that the KGs being at the tower is somehow and HAS to be relevant and important to Jon.So to RLJ it is a clue and if its  not  answered it makes any theory invalid.

a. Could the KG being at the tower be nothing else but being there for Jon?That doesn't tell me who his parents are.

2.You are assuming that Wylla having nursed Jon can ONLY mean that it has something to do with RLJ.

a.So what if Wylla nursed Jon? He needed a wet nurse.What does that have to do with who are his parents?What does it have to do with RLJ?

3.You are assuming that Ned being honorable or not and bringing home a bastard can only mean its relevant to RLJ.

a.So Ned being honorable and bringing home a bastard could only mean its Rhaegar's?No it doesn't.

4.You are assuming Ned not telling Jon or Cat can ONLY mean he is Rhaegar and Lyanna's son.

a. Again why is this important and can its importance if any only mean Lyanna and Rhaegar are Jon's parent? No it doesn't 

5.Ned never tells Robert Wylla is Jon's mother.Robert asks Ned about the girl he had a moment with and Robert assumed she was Jon's mother. Think of this.If Robert thinks Ned had a one time moment with a girl,and he had a bastard isn't it logical to Robert that the one time fling resulted in Jon?He just let Robert believe his momentary lapse resulted in Jon.

I can go on ,and on with this.In the end it comes to the same thing. Most of the elements of RLJ relies on having a preconcieved idea about what the clues are and or how they can be fityes to the theory.

On 3/7/2018 at 6:04 PM, Jon_Stargaryen said:

This may be a bit tinfoil, but I believe that part of the purpose of R+L=J is controlling dragons. If you think this is ridiculous, you can skip the rest.

One of the greatest elements of ASoIaF is the juxtaposition of different types of magic: blood/sacrificial magic, earth/nature magic, basic magic with little cost, etc.

With regards to R+L=J, I think Jon's abilities as a warg might come into play- especially if he can get some time with the dragons to form a bond.

At present (in the books/fuck the show) Dany's greatest issue is that she has no control over her children. They can sometimes act in her best interest, but they do what they want.

One of the defining characteristics of a skinchanger is that they're animals seem to be obedient, even when not being used.

This could be useful for someone wishing to control a living weapon of mass destruction.

That's my tinfoil theory/greatest wish.

I also hope Mel will resurrect Jon (if he's actually dead), Thoros of Myr style.

Here's the thing though.One doesn't need to be a Targ to control a dragon.One only need  have the blood of a Targ/Old Valyria but not the name.

E.g.Why else would Mel assume Stannis has a dragon to wake,and why else would Aemon first hope stannis was TPTWP.

"He has the blood,Egg's little girl."

Who was Robert,Stannis and Renly's grandmother.She was a Targ.

Dany has bonded to the dragon who called out to her with Dragonsong, and bathe her in fire in her dream and she was not consumed- Drogon

The other two are up for grabs from anyone who can do the same or bind a dragon through sorcery.All she did was wake them.They did not call to her and she did not answer them.

On 3/7/2018 at 7:27 PM, the trees have eyes said:

I am merely quoting what you posted yourself in this very thread ;).  If you want to refine or amend your comments to explain that you meant something different then that's fair enough but your statements have changed substantively over the last few posts so it does look a little bit like you are arguing with yourself! 

I'm not really interested in the 999th debate over R+L=J(=/=J) and you are entirely welcome to your opinions and the evolution of your belief or disbelief in the theory no doubt explains where you stand.  I understand how passionately some people feel on this and all things ASOIAF related so you will have your opinions confirmed or refuted when the novels come out and no sooner.  I just thought (and still do) that your comment answered the OP's question very succinctly.

And you see the problem?  You are straight back into saying it's too obvious.  Without batting an eyelid you launch straight back into repeating the argument that it's obvious and the author doesn't do obvious despite arguing with me that you don't!  Maybe this is just a joke at my expense?

You also have any number of posts in this very thread from readers who have said they did not find R+L=J to be obvious but you are disregarding all of them and insisting it is.  Why?  Is it so hard to accept that you really did pick up on the clues and / or instinctively realise something that other people didn't?

This seems a bit of a muddle to me.  You are saying R+L=J is the most logical or probable answer from reading the books so what are you basing your answer "that made more sense overall" on?  GRRM is an author, the answers are meant to be in the books. 

And purely out of curiosity what answer makes more sense to you?

Wasn't aguing with myself just pointing out what my process in this journey was about ,and i still haven't nor feel the need to go through every detail to tell you the same thing- I don't subscribe to this theory.

I don't think you are "listening" to what i am saying. This is all matter of context,and i apologize if i missed a few steps in pulling this together for you. I do have a tendency to project a conversation 4 thoughts down the line with the other party in the dark.

You recall me saying its not as easy as us saying its obvious .You also saw me post IMO it is obvious.

It is obvious and not obvious depending on who you ask.

1.You have posters who have honestly stated not to have seen it reading wise,and they came on here and went on the RLJ thread and the "clues" they pointed out convinced them.These people still didn't get it ,they were basically told what were clues and that formed a belief. If people are honest and not BSing themeselves they will agree with that statement.

2.You have others who because of certain influences of literature saw familiar elements and made a conclusion based on that. I admit i was in that category and totally dismissed the things that sounded a warning bell in my mind.

3.Then their were those who saw the truth AND the herring running side by side.They were more familiar in some cases with GRRM's other works and so they picked up on the misdirections,unreliable narrators etc a bit quicker.

So who is right? Those who say it is obvious or those who say it isn't? I'm saying what "we" think doesn't matter because we are just along for the ride.

4. Then there is GRRM who speaks about wanting to suprise fans,creating a mysteries that his grandmother couldn't figure out and whose wife says in response to this same arguement ( I believe someone from Heresy has this quote) that GRRM doesn't do obvious.

Numero 4 is the crux of the matter.

1.I have to believe based on what GRRM has said, his grandmother would figure RLJ out.

2. I have to believe Paris who says her husband doesn't do obvious.

So I ask you again. How am i using the same old "its to obvious arguement?,"how exactly am i changing my tune now? 

Nope,I never said RLJ is the most logical, you are putting words in my mouth with that one.In a nutshell it was lazy reading with regard to that.

When I mistrusted the info on the Others I sought until I found the answer because I was interested in this aspect.

I didn't care who was Jon's parents so when the problems with it arose in my mind I didn't care to answer those questions.

My motive for even looking at it was just to bring balance back to Heresy.But again after reading it I came out on the not RLJ aspect.

I was tethering between Aerys and Robert for a bit.Robert won due to crucial factors that I palmed myself in the face for later.

Edited by wolfmaid7
Spaces anti finish post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Geddus said:

I'm not sure what's more unbelievable, Ned being a bigamist or Ned usurping his nephew.

Where was he usurping Jon?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×