Jump to content
manchester_babe

Why do book readers hate R+L=J?

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Deepbollywood Motte said:

It is not set in stone (yet).

It's so far from being set in stone that we can't even show Rhaegar and Lyanna were in the same location for a single day during Robert's Rebellion.

We can imagine they were; we can decide they were; we can argue about flowers and symbolism and dreams; but it certainly can't be demonstrated using the canon, which is why it never has been.

Whether they were, and they had some sort of sexual relationship, and Lyanna became pregnant with Rhaegar's baby, etc etc, is similarly a matter of fan conjecture.  We're going to have to wait and see, so hopefully there will be more novels in this series (but that's also a matter of fan conjecture).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Deepbollywood Motte said:

 

Well I guess you have read more books than us then...

Posts like this and people like you is why a lot of people don't like the discussion of the theory, unrelated to their believe in it or not. It is not set in stone (yet).

Yes, it's very childish and tiresome. The answer to the question:  Why people don't discuss anything else on the forum.  Quite frankly, snobbish behavior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, manchester_babe said:

Then again, I'm a huge Jonsa shipper, and I want Jon to be something more than a run of the mill anti-hero. 

I will never ever in a million years understand Jonsa or Jonrya. :dunno:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, manchester_babe said:

Then again, I'm a huge Jonsa shipper, and I want Jon to be something more than a run of the mill anti-hero. 

:stunned:

Incest... ? Is it still the case when they're cousins?

Edited by Yukle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Yukle said:

:stunned:

Incest... ? Is it still the case when they're cousins?

It is, not b/c of being kin but rather because they grew up as siblings, always saw each others as siblings, etc. My two penny worth.

Edited by kissdbyfire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

It is, not b/c of being kin but rather because they grew up as siblings, always saw each others as siblings, etc. My two penny worth.

Yeah... I also find that weird. How would that conversation go?

"We should do it. Shame we're siblings."

"Turns out we're not."

(Already sweaty in bed.)

"That's a plus."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Trigger Warning said:

Some people are heavily invested in this story being more complex than it likely is. 

I would agree some people over analyze. A lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, LynnS said:

Yes, it's very childish and tiresome. The answer to the question:  Why people don't discuss anything else on the forum.  Quite frankly, snobbish behavior.

This really becomes my biggest issue with this forum. Isn't that people disagree or have different ideas. To hate R+L=J or people who believe it is just silly, like wise to feel the same to those that dont agree with it. 

Problem is when those who don't believe something have to sift through pages of dribble from the same people who clearly only back one idea on things and insist in going around and bashing on all those who want to question further. And it's not that they simply come in and offer different views, they come in like a wrecking ball trying to cast shade on the Op's and their intelligence levels. Which just either makes people want to keep silent or become salty back. Neither is good. I've done both too. To have to sift through what your able to view though an option, seems rather week too. As it can also be viewed as a weak standpoint and thus dont' want to address certain thought's when this is not really the case. It totally cuts at the free spirit of open discussion which is unfortunate. 

Why can't we book mark R+L=J and it's clues, while we look to other possibilities? Even if just for fun. Some theories i think hold weight even if they are maybe missing parts. Some of these theories contradict others. I can see the book going multiple ways sometimes. (not questions or anything directed at you just the subject matter it self) :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Deepbollywood Motte said:

It is not set in stone (yet).

That is actually what I hate most about this forum. No matter how good a theory is, it gets declared "invalid" earlier or later, because "only what has written in plain text counts" and "even if it is true, is was not in the text when you wrote the theory, so it is still false". 

That is not against you specificly, @acwill07 did not give any points either and also declared his version "true", because it "is (the) reality" and everyone else "makes zero sense". 

At least I am here to discuss, not to let out my inner fanatism. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

I will never ever in a million years understand Jonsa or Jonrya. :dunno:

I suppose many people don't ship them as a love match, but as a political match. And that makes sense for those who want Jon to be King in the North; if R+L=J is true, then Jon has a claim to the North, but he is a bastard so his claim will be difficult, but he can make his claim stronger by marrying one of his legitimate female cousins from his mother's older brother. In this case, Jonsa is preferable, as Sansa is older than Arya and thusly has a stronger claim.

Jonrya, on the other hand, I personally think is mostly a love match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Vaedys Targaryen said:

I suppose many people don't ship them as a love match, but as a political match. And that makes sense for those who want Jon to be King in the North; if R+L=J is true, then Jon has a claim to the North, but he is a bastard so his claim will be difficult, but he can make his claim stronger by marrying one of his legitimate female cousins from his mother's older brother. In this case, Jonsa is preferable, as Sansa is older than Arya and thusly has a stronger claim.

Jonrya, on the other hand, I personally think is mostly a love match.

See i always found this an interesting point cause IF R+L=J then Jon has a claim to the Iron Throne as some see it and a claim to the North. Both times he is a bastard though so some legitimizing and or a marriage alliance is going to be needed. 

Though i am curious how Jon would feel about either. Especially the Iron Throne and the South as he has never been there, knows nothing personally of it, and seems to be wholly committed to House Stark and the North. I really have a hard time picturing Jon claiming the Iron throne or caring about it. Or even caring that Rhaegar is his father. He would care about Lyanna being his mother, but i think at this point, unless his father is some one who has actually interacted in his life and affected it, or can still affect it, Jon will view Eddard as his father. 

Though im beginning to lean towards Mance as Jon's real father, so i think it will indeed have an impact on future events in the story and Jon's feeling on where he belongs in the North. As the man to unify the North and the Wildlings for good. This seems much much more in line with his arch and the thing he indeed died for than anything to do with the south. The South i think is lucky in the war with the Others in that Winterfell and the rest of the North lies in between the South and the Wall.

Which is why i dont hate the Rheagar idea, but im beginning to lean against it the more and more i actually look at it. 

Not only does Jon's arch seem to echo Bael the Bard and his son born in the Crypts of Winterfell, but Dany's seems to possibly echo that of Gael the Winterchild and Alysanne, being born possibly at Queen's Crown tower which would mirror Dany being born at the Tower of Joy. 

This is something i think people have missed as far as Alysanne and Gael, and ignore as far as Bael and his son are concerned. Though this imo answers much more and goes in line with their archs better. 

Jon as King in the North or Lord of the North who finally makes peace with the wildlings and Dany as Queen possibly in the South as that is where her arch is centered around. Though i can see their stories intertwining, i dont see them intertwining so much that Jon's arch ends in the South and her's in the North. 

Edit- And Jon marrying Dany and ruling together i just dont see happening. Magic dying out of the world can't be the only sad part about the ending, that was literally the sad part about LOTR. That and Frodo sailing to his death in the undying lands. I dont think Martin would rip that same ending. Though maybe the main characters dying, but in a less subtle way. As a lot of people missed that Frodo is going to heaven and can't return, and saw it more as just Frodo choosing to leave and never come back which i only partially right. He's willingly succumbing to death.

Edited by AlaskanSandman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SirArthur said:

That is actually what I hate most about this forum. No matter how good a theory is, it gets declared "invalid" earlier or later, because "only what has written in plain text counts" and "even if it is true, is was not in the text when you wrote the theory, so it is still false". 

That is not against you specificly, @acwill07 did not give any points either and also declared his version "true", because it "is (the) reality" and everyone else "makes zero sense". 

At least I am here to discuss, not to let out my inner fanatism. 

LOL!  Frankly, I'm tired of the whole discussion where everything points to RLJ even with a reasonable explanation that something else might be true.  I stick to the text for that reason.  I still believe rightly or wrongly that some of the answers are contained in the text.  I prefer not to look at everything through the RLJ lens since I think that limits discovery.  I'm more curious about Bran and Arya at this point than Jon.   It's not that alternate explanations are too complicated; it only complicates accepted thinking that something else might be true.   Typically that creates a defensive reaction with a silly chorus of neener-neeners; something that involves tribalism, group-think and identity politics; characterized as 'the only intelligent answer'. 

Edited by LynnS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/18/2018 at 6:14 PM, JNR said:

Well, what he said was

This doesn't seem to say anything about Lyanna's location to me, because there are many ways in which that dream might not have been literal besides that.  For instance, in real life, there are no storms of rose petals, and the sky is never streaked with blood, yet both are found in that fever dream.

Or perhaps GRRM meant that Ned's dialogue wasn't literally as rendered (because, for instance, in real life, he mentioned his sister, which he never did in canon).  

They can be as far as I'm concerned.  However, the Youtube theories on this subject I've seen routinely take liberties with the established facts and timeline that make them lesser authorities.  

For instance, Preston Jacobs basically just handwaves away timeline issues by claiming the timeline doesn't make sense.   I'm pretty sure it does make sense, and any good theory of Jon's parentage will fit, and so will the one GRRM eventually reveals, whether it's RLJ or not.

 

On 2/18/2018 at 4:42 AM, Black Crow said:

 

I'm afraid I'd disagree with that interpretation because context is everything. GRRM's comments were made in response to a specific question and whilst I agree that a fight took place and ended as described, GRRM's warning about dreams not being literal, given the context of that question strongly suggests that Lyanna's death took place somewhere else.

 

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/Concerning_the_Tower_of_Joy

January 02, 2002

CONCERNING THE TOWER OF JOY

I have a question which I'm sure you can (and will?) answer. It's about the Tower of Joy. The image we get from Ned's description is pretty powerful. But it doesn't make sense. The top three kingsguards, including the lord commander and the best knight in ages, Ser Arthur Dayne are present there. Lyanna is in the tower, she asked Ned to promise him something. This, so says the general consensus us little Jon Snow, who is Lyanna's and Rhaegar's. No sense denying this ;)

However, what are the Kingsguards doing fighting Eddard? Eddard would never hurt Lyanna, nor her child. The little one would be safe with Eddard as well, him being a close relative. So I ask you, was there someone else with Lyanna and Jon?

GRRM:

You'll need to wait for future books to find out more about the Tower of Joy and what happened there, I fear.

I might mention, though, that Ned's account, which you refer to, was in the context of a dream... and a fever dream at that. Our dreams are not always literal.

 

I think that both these ideas can be true and think the answer may lay somewhere along these lines.

As an example we only have to look at this same scenario under the lens of Robert's death.

1.Ned has a fight with Jamie and is injured.He dreams about what happens with Dayne and company.He remarks how foreboding it was to have that dream now.

2.Time passes Robert goes on a hunt and gets mortally injured.It takes time to get him back to the castle.

3.Ned finds him in his bed of blood after he passes 3 men in white cloaks guarding him.Ned even referenced it for us 3 men in white cloaks as climbed the stairs.

What happens we have Robert making a request of Ned to teach Joff makes sure he becomes a goof man yada yada.

And Ned has a promise me Ned moment reminiscent of Lyanna.

But what is remarkable is the series of events and when the elements occurred.

1.The cause of Robert's death.Had nothing to do with his final location in the tower.

2His fatal wound occurred elsewhere.

3.Ned's fight had nothing to do with that.

4.The kingsguard that were there weren't with him until the end.Except Selmy.

But this is an example of how lots of things can come together having really nothing to do except where they ended up and why.

Funny enough this "is" more or less Ned's dream.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, AlaskanSandman said:

That and Frodo sailing to his death in the undying lands. I dont think Martin would rip that same ending.

Well, I'm not even sure Frodo did die in the Undying Lands.  Changing a country's name would have involved a lot of tedious paperwork, etc.

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

×