Jump to content

The Meereenese Knot started at the Tower of Joy in 2005


The Map Guy

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, EloImFizzy said:

Just like most crackpot theories it's certainly fun to look into, but I personally don't see it. Alot of the things you pointed out seem like quite a stretch. 

With the other comments so far....thanks...i guess.

I have one more big R+L=J&M clue up my sleeve...i'm saving that for later. It's fun and only stretchy if no one can decode it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, The Map Guy said:

If one sibling is found and killed, the blood line survives with the other one. Didn't something like this happened in a TV show we know?

if separating the prince's kid(s) is a thing for safety, why did Ned take Jon to Winterfell at all? The reason of course is his promise to his dying sister to keep him safe. If that is the case, sending Meera  live in the diseased ridden bogs of the neck would be counter to that. Otherwise, why not send both kids to live there. Crannogmen rarely leave the neck and no one would ever be the wiser. Ned would have a happy marriage and not have to feign dishonoring his wife to protect his sister's child(ren). any way you look at it, Meera being Jon's twin falls apart with basic logic.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, The Map Guy said:

If one sibling is found and killed, the blood line survives with the other one. Didn't something like this happened in a TV show we know?

Nobody gives a duck about or can find Greywater Watch. If survival is the only goal, keeping of twins there seems the safest thing to do. Jon could have lived a comfortable (I assume Greywater Watch is nice enough if you are member of House Reed) away from any and all prying eyes.

But Jon (and Meera if your idea holds) are members of the pack and the only reminders of Lyanna to Ned, so that IMHO is why he insists on raising Jon at Winterfell no matter what strife it causes with Cat.

Not that I personally believe it but if R+L=D & J then it makes sense that Dany had to be taken away as she looks really Targ-y. But would readily not be the case for Meera, dark hair and green eyes does not remind most folk of a Targ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Dorian Martell's son said:

if separating the prince's kid(s) is a thing for safety, why did Ned take Jon to Winterfell at all? The reason of course is his promise to his dying sister to keep him safe. If that is the case, sending Meera  live in the diseased ridden bogs of the neck would be counter to that. Otherwise, why not send both kids to live there. Crannogmen rarely leave the neck and no one would ever be the wiser. Ned would have a happy marriage and not have to feign dishonoring his wife to protect his sister's child(ren). any way you look at it, Meera being Jon's twin falls apart with basic logic.  

I think we are crossing the line of over-analyzing...but i'll give my speculation

1. Promise me Ned was for Ned to the twins to Winterfell

2. Ned complies with Jon, but feels separating Meera would make it safer

3. Howland volunteers for Meera since Lyanna, via Knight of Laughing Tree, saved Howland's life and honor at the Tourney. This "butterfly effects" it to R+L love story, Robert's Rebellion, Rhaegar's death, twins, and Lyanna death. Howland adds this all up at TOJ, and volunteers to take Meera as his redemption for his "butterfly effect" cowardice at the Tourney. His cowardice started everything.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Map Guy said:

I think we are crossing the line of over-analyzing...but i'll give my speculation

1. Promise me Ned was for Ned to the twins to Winterfell

2. Ned complies with Jon, but feels separating Meera would make it safer

3. Howland voluntaries for Meera since Lyanna, via Knight of Laughing Tree, saved Howland's life and honor at the Tourney. This "butterfly effects" it to R+L love story, Robert's Rebellion, Rhaegar's death, twins, and Lyanna death. Howland adds this all up at TOJ, and voluntaries to take Meera as his redemption for his "butterfly effect" cowardice at the Tourney. His cowardice started everything.......

2: Not at all. If safety was an issue, both or neither would have gone to the diseased ridden bogs of the neck, for different reasons. 
3: holy crap that is a reach considering how little we know of Howland. 
It isn't over analysis, it is over reaching to supply a rationale for baseless crackpot  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, The Map Guy said:

I think we are crossing the line of over-analyzing...but i'll give my speculation

This forum hasn't "crossed the line into over-analyzing" it has invaded Over-analyzing, forced the locals to build infrastructure to facilitate the forums vicious conquest of Navel-Gazing-So-Hard-You-Shove-Your-Head-Inside-Your-Belly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, The Map Guy said:

My intentions are to show that the twin clues in AGOT, ACOK, & ASOS.

My whole post was based on how the twin stuff died out with the Meereenese Knot in AFFC & ADWD.

I personally feel like its a lot of clues for twins in just three books, esp. since Meera does not get the same screen time as Jon Snow. 

I'm not sure I understand what "twin clues" you think you have quoted, or how these "clues" died out in AFFC & ADWD.  My point is that you have not cited any clues that suggest Jon and Meera are twins, besides for them being of a similar age and Howland Reed being present at TOJ.  Your other "clues" don't suggest anything at all to me, although again to each their own.  I don't think Meera taking one of the Stark swords is a clue for anything, considering that Hodor and Osha also take swords.  Your reading of Ned using the word "her" makes far less sense than the simple reading that Howland took Ned's hand from Lyanna's.  The other stuff you cite also seems like just you making major leaps with little to no evidence to support it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Dorian Martell's son said:

2: Not at all. If safety was an issue, both or neither would have gone to the diseased ridden bogs of the neck, for different reasons. 
3: holy crap that is a reach considering how little we know of Howland. 
It isn't over analysis, it is over reaching to supply a rationale for baseless crackpot  

If you want a really want to over-analyze, perhaps this pre-2005 R+L=J&M theory is the butterfly effect to our ASOIAF over-analysis culture we have nowadays.

If GRRM stuck to his original twins story, maybe he could of finished all of ASOIAF by now. But George Lucas forced him off track...causing years and years of delays and re-writes. The fandom has too much time during these delays, and over-analyzing and over-theorizing almost everything.

How's that for over-analyzing? lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Ylath's Snout said:

This forum hasn't "crossed the line into over-analyzing" it has invaded Over-analyzing, forced the locals to build infrastructure to facilitate the forums vicious conquest of Navel-Gazing-So-Hard-You-Shove-Your-Head-Inside-Your-Belly.

If you want a really want to over-analyze, perhaps this pre-2005 R+L=J&M theory is the butterfly effect to our ASOIAF over-analysis culture we have nowadays.

If GRRM stuck to his original twins story, maybe he could of finished all of ASOIAF by now. But George Lucas forced him off track...causing years and years of delays and re-writes. The fandom has too much time during these delays, and over-analyzing and over-theorizing almost everything.

How's that for over-analyzing? lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Map Guy said:

If you want a really want to over-analyze, perhaps this pre-2005 R+L=J&M theory is the butterfly effect to our ASOIAF over-analysis culture we have nowadays.

If GRRM stuck to his original twins story, maybe he could of finished all of ASOIAF by now. But George Lucas forced him off track...causing years and years of delays and re-writes. The fandom has too much time during these delays, and over-analyzing and over-theorizing almost everything.

How's that for over-analyzing? lol

There is no "original" twins theory. That is the problem with your crackpot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The Map Guy said:

If GRRM stuck to his original twins story, maybe he could of finished all of ASOIAF by now. But George Lucas forced him off track...causing years and years of delays and re-writes.

If GRRM was planning some sort of J & M  (Or anyone really) twin reveal then the Luke and Leia comparison would have been made before 2005.

If GRRM can't deal with have a interested fanbase than that is kind of his problem to deal with. After all he gets a cut from all the ASOIAF merch and sales of his other books from his increased name recognition. Would Nightflyers be a show with GoT's fame?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Tagganaro said:

I'm not sure I understand what "twin clues" you think you have quoted, or how these "clues" died out in AFFC & ADWD.  My point is that you have not cited any clues that suggest Jon and Meera are twins, besides for them being of a similar age and Howland Reed being present at TOJ.  Your other "clues" don't suggest anything at all to me, although again to each their own.  I don't think Meera taking one of the Stark swords is a clue for anything, considering that Hodor and Osha also take swords.  Your reading of Ned using the word "her" makes far less sense than the simple reading that Howland took Ned's hand from Lyanna's.  The other stuff you cite also seems like just you making major leaps with little to no evidence to support it.  

Ok, I will correct myself with this technicality...Meera is given Stark clues in ACOK & ASOS.

The only reason I mentioned twins is that Ned & Howland were at TOJ, and Jon & Meera are the same age....making them twins is a possibility with the story of R+L=J.

If my clues are not convincing to you, so be it. I still have one big one I haven't revealed yet.

But if Jon was given the introduction: "At the foot of the hall, the doors open and a gust of cold air made the torches flame brighter for an instant "...the fandom would of added this to list of R+L=J clues.

The twins clues died out after 2005 AFFC, because Stars Wars in 2005 would have Luke & Leia match origin stories with Jon & Meera. George Lucas is bigger than GRRM in 2005, and GRRM can't be accused of plagiarizing Lucas or AOSIAF will never succeed 13 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ylath's Snout said:

If GRRM was planning some sort of J & M  (Or anyone really) twin reveal then the Luke and Leia comparison would have been made before 2005.

I was waiting for this comment lol.

Luke & Leia were revealed to be twins in the 1980s with no origin story about their mother.

Leia said she remembered her mother in the 1980 films.

This was to be a plot hole in Star Wars by 2005.

But Leia never knew her mother, because in 2005, her mother was revealed to have died in child birth for twins.

From the 1980s to 2005, no one knew Luke & Leia's mother died from their childbirth....including GRRM.

This Star Wars plot hole threw GRRM's original twins story into potential plagiarism, coincidentally ...... in 2005.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to add to the inconsistencies, why would Howland Reed pass her off as his trueborn (and firstborn) child if she isn't even related to him at all?  Not to mention that she was the heir until Jojen was born, and would still be heir if she had only sisters.   I would expect Lady Reed's reaction to be even worse than Catelyn's was to Jon.  Any trueborn girls she has would be displaced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The Map Guy said:

This was to be a plot hole in Star Wars by 2005.

Not a pothole, just a "we don't know".

Meera and Jojen's mother is a "we don't know anything about" person not a plot hole.

Given that Leia doesn't remember her mother, her death isn't a stretch to assume even before the prequels. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Nevets said:

Just to add to the inconsistencies, why would Howland Reed pass her off as his trueborn (and firstborn) child if she isn't even related to him at all?  Not to mention that she was the heir until Jojen was born, and would still be heir if she had only sisters.   I would expect Lady Reed's reaction to be even worse than Catelyn's was to Jon.  Any trueborn girls she has would be displaced.

As far as I know, Howland Reed was single by the time of Tower of Joy.

Jyana Reed was never mentioned until 2005 AFFC appendix. She has no other mention anywhere else.

Howland Reed had no Lady Reed to deal with in Greywater Watch when he brought Meera there.

 

I even have a wild theory, off topic:

Jyana Reed doesn't exists.

Meera Reed is not a Reed, but a Stark-Targaryen.

Jojen Reed is not a Reed too, but a green men.

But no proof about the last line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, The Map Guy said:

I was waiting for this comment lol.

Luke & Leia were revealed to be twins in the 1980s with no origin story about their mother.

Leia said she remembered her mother in the 1980 films.

This was to be a plot hole in Star Wars by 2005.

But Leia never knew her mother, because in 2005, her mother was revealed to have died in child birth for twins.

From the 1980s to 2005, no one knew Luke & Leia's mother died from their childbirth....including GRRM.

This Star Wars plot hole threw GRRM's original twins story into potential plagiarism, coincidentally ...... in 2005.

The plot of a mother dying in childbirth and her children being separated for their own safety due to their parentage is, I think, sufficiently generic that no-one would accuse Martin (or anybody else) of plagiarizing Star Wars.  

And if Jon does have a twin, which I seriously doubt, both Daenerys and (f)Aegon are far more likely candidates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ylath's Snout said:

Not a pothole, just a "we don't know".

Meera and Jojen's mother is a "we don't know anything about" person not a plot hole.

Given that Leia doesn't remember her mother, her death isn't a stretch to assume even before the prequels. 

But Leia DID mention she remembered her mother in the 1980s film. Implying her mother was still alive when Leia was a child.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Nevets said:

The plot of a mother dying in childbirth and her children being separated for their own safety due to their parentage is, I think, sufficiently generic that no-one would accuse Martin (or anybody else) of plagiarizing Star Wars.  

And if Jon does have a twin, which I seriously doubt, both Daenerys and (f)Aegon are far more likely candidates.

But this is the year 2005. George Lucas is a household name, GRRM is still up and coming. If GRRM revealed that Jon & Meera are twins in 2005 AFFC, the people of 2005 will constantly debate if it was plagiarism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, The Map Guy said:

This was to be a plot hole in Star Wars by 2005.

George Lucas is a crappy writer. Luke and Leia were supposed to be the romantic couple as of A New Hope in 1977, but afterward, focus groups (pre internet poll techniques to judge the popularity of things) overwhelmingly wanted Leia to get with Han so Empire Strikes Back in 1980 was re-written for Leia and Han to get together. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...