Jump to content
nyser1

The Tower of Joy

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, The Ned's Little Girl said:

I'm going to nitpick over this one thing, because the reason I almost always argue back when someone says "and a fevered dream at that" is because it somehow implies that it's the drugs talking when describing the dream. The drugs are irrelevant. It's the same dream he's had before and that's the takeaway that we have to pay attention to. Ned is haunted by something represented by the dream and he has been for a long time because it's an old dream. Pointing out Ned's being drugged during this occurrence of the dream just muddies stuff up.

And of course the dream isn't entirely literal. Just the fact that it's a dream is enough to indicate that. Although, it is explicit proven history to a certain extent: the encounter, the battle and the deaths did actually happen. But that's not what the dream is about; it's not there as explication of history. It's there as explication of Ned.

The tower long fallen, the 3 knights in white cloaks and the bed of blood: these are the symbolic representations of the burdens carried by Ned and blighting his life to the end of his days. All the death, all the lies, all the suffering; Ned caused none of it to happen, he wasn't responsible for any of it, yet he had to bear the burdens of those events and their aftermath always. He had to allow his reputation to be besmirched before his peers. He had to blemish his marriage and make his wife suffer to maintain a deceit. Most of all, he had to inflict enormous suffering upon Jon Snow, an absolute innocent. Sure, he saved Jon's life but at what cost to both of them to do so?

So the dream is Ned trying yet again to come to grips with all this. Why did this happen? Why did it happen the way it did and not some other way? What did it mean then and what does it continue to mean to Ned all these years later? You know, themes. It was explained much better by @SFDanny above (it's in post #88).

I would argue that, in particular, the conversation between Ned and the 3 KG is wildly inaccurate. But that doesn't mean that it isn't true. It's just that its truth isn't about "what really happened on that day in that place".

People always repeat that line, because it’s something the author himself has said:

Quote

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.

Yes, Ned acknowledged it was an old dream, but he does think of it as a ‘dream’ and not a memory. We have no way of knowing if milk of the poppy changed any of the elements, but I think recent events caused him to have the dream, which implies his encounter with Jaime reminded him of something in the dream. Then as he’s walking towards the royal apartments and sees where the Kingsguard are stationed, he “remembers”. And when Robert pleads in a whispered voice from his bloody bed, he immediately associates him with Lyanna. Ned is the one noting the parallels, and I’m just bring attention to the passage.

Edited by Feather Crystal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Feather Crystal said:

I don't know why I'm bothering to explain all this,

Must be something in the air, because I don't know why I'm coming back to this, either.

11 hours ago, Feather Crystal said:

because you've made it clear that you will only accept explicit text as evidence.

A wild misinterpretation. There is a lot that I accept and that is not explicitely stated.

What I say is that symbolism/parallels/ whatever must NOT contradict explicitely stated facts. To consider something a fact means that it does not contradict anything else stated in the books and can be verified by other accounts - something like an alibi. All accounts point to Jaime being the single KG in KL after the Trident, nothing contradicts it. Therefore, every valid theory must take this into account and not contradict it, or else it is invalidated from the very start.

11 hours ago, Feather Crystal said:

I haven't seen anything that merits reporting to the mods, and I hope it remains that way.

Then quit bringing up presumed personal attacks.

4 hours ago, Feather Crystal said:

Yes, Ned acknowledged it was an old dream, but he does think of it as a ‘dream’ and not a memory.

Yes. The KG waiting outside the tower, Ned approaching with his wraith-like friends, the dialogue, the blue petal storm, Lyanna screaming, that is a dream. The seven against three, only two living to ride away, eight cairns built from the stones of the tower, the promise to Lyanna, those are memories, either described as "as it had been in life" in the commentary to the dream, and/or mentioned in other passages when Ned is awake and lucid.

4 hours ago, Feather Crystal said:

We have no way of knowing if milk of the poppy changed any of the elements, but I think recent events caused him to have the dream, which implies his encounter with Jaime reminded him of something in the dream.

The dream is certainly not a recording of what actually happened there on that day. The tower, the three KG and Lyanna in her bed of blood are the core elements which he dreamt repeatedly, the particulars were certainly different each time.

The encounter with Jaime may have contribute (he is a KG and it nearly cost Ned his life) but you're forgetting what preceded - thoughts about Lyanna and his promises to her, not to mention his promise to Barra's mother and her reaction which parallel Lyanna's last moment.

 

4 hours ago, Feather Crystal said:

Then as he’s walking towards the royal apartments and sees where the Kingsguard are stationed, he “remembers”. And when Robert pleads in a whispered voice from his bloody bed, he immediately associates him with Lyanna. Ned is the one noting the parallels, and I’m just bring attention to the passage.

This has been duly noted. Many times.

However, what Ned "remembers" are "three men in white cloaks" - not where they are, but who they are.

On 4/14/2019 at 5:25 PM, Feather Crystal said:

This is for you both. The three Kingsguard were guarding Elia, Rhaenys, and Aegon, not the king. The drawbridge was pulled up and the Kingsguard were behind it. There would be no way to help protect Aerys without letting the drawbridge down. 

The argument that Jaime doesn’t ask for them to guard the king simply has no merit, because they already were commanded to do something: guard Elia and the children, whereas Darry was available.

And why would Aerys assign them to Elia's protection in the first place?

Besides:

 
Quote

 

"You swore to keep him safe," said Whent.
"And the children, them as well," said Prince Lewyn.
Prince Rhaegar burned with a cold light, now white, now red, now dark. "I left my wife and children in your hands."
"I never thought he'd hurt them." Jaime's sword was burning less brightly now. "I was with the king . . ."
"Killing the king," said Ser Arthur.
"Cutting his throat," said Prince Lewyn.

 

 
This is Jaime's guilty conscience - Elia and her children were his responsibility, no-one else left there. Perfectly in line with other statements that Jaime was there alone during the Sack.
 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, Feather Crystal said:

People always repeat that line, because it’s something the author himself has said:

Yes, Ned acknowledged it was an old dream, but he does think of it as a ‘dream’ and not a memory. We have no way of knowing if milk of the poppy changed any of the elements, but I think recent events caused him to have the dream, which implies his encounter with Jaime reminded him of something in the dream. Then as he’s walking towards the royal apartments and sees where the Kingsguard are stationed, he “remembers”. And when Robert pleads in a whispered voice from his bloody bed, he immediately associates him with Lyanna. Ned is the one noting the parallels, and I’m just bring attention to the passage.

Sorry friend, I admire your tenacity, but the key problem with this theory is the idea that this battle royale, in which three of the most puissant warriors in the land were slain six non-knights of the north, would not have been seen by anyone or did not make it into the history books. Plus, Ned has an entire army at his back, but he chooses to take on the most well-trained, well-armed, well-armored knights with only six men.

Edited by John Suburbs
mis-click

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Ygrain said:

This is Jaime's guilty conscience - Elia and her children were his responsibility, no-one else left there. Perfectly in line with other statements that Jaime was there alone during the Sack.

I'm sure anything I say to this won't be satisfactory, so I'm going to take a bit of time to come up with something good! LOL :D

6 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

Sorry friend, I admire your tenacity, but the key problem with this theory is the idea that this battle royale, in which three of the most puissant warriors in the land were slain six non-knights of the north, would not have been seen by anyone or did not make it into the history books. Plus, Ned has an entire army at his back, but he chooses to take on the most well-trained, well-armed, well-armored knights with only six men.

You know what niggles in my brain when I consider whether or not Ned did fight the Kingsguard down in the Prince's Pass? How he could have explained why they were there. Since we're going that route, we're presuming his promise was to keep Jon's true parentage a secret. His backstory for Jon is that Wylla is his mother and that he met her - where? Catelyn just says 'on campaign'. If people know that Ned killed the Kingsguard in the Prince's Pass, why hasn't anybody questioned the reason why they stayed back when everybody believes Rhaenys and Aegon were killed in Kings Landing? It shouldn't take three Kingsguard to hold Lyanna hostage, and it wouldn't make sense to keep holding her hostage when the war was lost, so what possible reason could Ned give for the Kingsguard being there without also giving Jon's parentage away?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

I'm sure anything I say to this won't be satisfactory, so I'm going to take a bit of time to come up with something good! LOL :D

Sure, go ahead.

5 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

His backstory for Jon is that Wylla is his mother and that he met her - where? Catelyn just says 'on campaign'.

Sorry to nitpick here, but it is unclear how far this backstory actually goes. It is a thing at Starfall, and Robert knows it, too, but it doesn't seem to be circulating around Winterfell the way Ashara's story was. There is a knowledge, or a rumour, about Jon's mother being commonborn, but no name is given. And above all, no-one seems to have an idea where Jon might have hailed from.

 

5 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

 If people know that Ned killed the Kingsguard in the Prince's Pass, why hasn't anybody questioned the reason why they stayed back when everybody believes Rhaenys and Aegon were killed in Kings Landing? 

And do they even know? Ned's own men returned with a story of Ned's single combat with Arthur Dayne, which we know to be incorrect. To my best memory, no place of the supposed combat is stated.

5 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

It shouldn't take three Kingsguard to hold Lyanna hostage, and it wouldn't make sense to keep holding her hostage when the war was lost, so what possible reason could Ned give for the Kingsguard being there without also giving Jon's parentage away?

Why hostage? It was widely believed that Rhaegar had fallen for Lyanna, and Rhaegar had the authority to command the KG to stay and guard her.  Ned Stark turned up to reclaim her, the KG refused to bend the knee, a fight ensued, the KG were killed and Lyanna died of a fever, anyway. Ned returns to KL to report to Robert and rekindle their bromance. A simple story, as close to the truth as possible, and no babies involved. If Ned was clever and used Dawn as a pretext for going to Starfall, from where he could send Jon to the North with Howland and either pick him somewhere along the way home, or - the best option, IMHO - have him sent right to Winterfell, preferably with a wetnurse hired somewhere along the way. No-one knows a thing, and there is no connection between the baby and the events at ToJ because of the time and space distance. 

Share this post


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

And do they even know? Ned's own men returned with a story of Ned's single combat with Arthur Dayne, which we know to be incorrect. To my best memory, no place of the supposed combat is stated.

If people didn't know where the three Kingsguard were or died, then I would expect at least one character to say, "where were those Kingsguard anyway? Why weren't they protecting the king?" But we get nothing - nobody says anything, and I find that suspicious.

31 minutes ago, Ygrain said:

Why hostage? It was widely believed that Rhaegar had fallen for Lyanna, and Rhaegar had the authority to command the KG to stay and guard her.  Ned Stark turned up to reclaim her, the KG refused to bend the knee, a fight ensued, the KG were killed and Lyanna died of a fever, anyway. Ned returns to KL to report to Robert and rekindle their bromance. A simple story, as close to the truth as possible, and no babies involved. If Ned was clever and used Dawn as a pretext for going to Starfall, from where he could send Jon to the North with Howland and either pick him somewhere along the way home, or - the best option, IMHO - have him sent right to Winterfell, preferably with a wetnurse hired somewhere along the way. No-one knows a thing, and there is no connection between the baby and the events at ToJ because of the time and space distance. 

To connect the Kingsguard to Lyanna is to also create suspicion about Jon, and I just can't see Ned telling the story that way. Plus it's said "they" found Ned holding Lyanna's hand, when Ned's dream says only he and Howland rode away. There are witnesses to Lyanna's death, and I'm presuming this is how we'll be fed the truth in a future book - from one of the witnesses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

If people didn't know where the three Kingsguard were or died, then I would expect at least one character to say, "where were those Kingsguard anyway? Why weren't they protecting the king?" But we get nothing - nobody says anything, and I find that suspicious.

It would certainly be interesting to see what people thought about the KG's absence, and I presume we will get a piece of someone's mind sooner or later. However, the very moment when Rhaegar returned to KL with no KG or Lyanna in sight,  everyone would just assume that he simply ordered them to guard her (and we know from GRRM that he had the authority to order them about). It would be a logical conclusion - he wouldn't have wanted his mistress abducted or running away - and this may be the reason why nobody batted a lash about it. - Mind you, the whole issue of "who is with the king?" starts only after the Sack, when Viserys had no KG about, but the KG at ToJ couldn't have known at that point. Yet, Ned's dream shows them being up-to-date with the situation and making an informed decision concerning what their KG duties are (whether they had an informant or only learned from Ned and the fight ensued after Lyanna's death is not relevant here).

27 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

To connect the Kingsguard to Lyanna is to also create suspicion about Jon,

How does it create suspicion about Jon if Ned did take some kind of precaution to make sure that the first time anyone hears about his bastard son, it is in an utterly disconnected situation? Plus, everybody has bastards and Lord Eddard is too honorable/too simple to lie, so why should anyone wonder about his cute little slip? We see this in the books, too - that people like a little dirt on the icons.

27 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

and I just can't see Ned telling the story that way.

Why not? We hear from the master of lies himself that the best lies are told with a grain of truth, and Ned's character would compell him to lie as little as possible. All he needs is to omit a couple things here and there and change only the strictly necessary. If the dream dialogue reflects the real situation, he did ask the KG to surrender (and it would be a logical thing to ask, anyway). Lyanna was feverish when she died, and people commonly die of a fever. Nothing suspicious there.

27 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

Plus it's said "they" found Ned holding Lyanna's hand, when Ned's dream says only he and Howland rode away.

1) That's not what the dream says, that's his memory.

2) He and Howland riding away is the result of the combat of seven against three. It says nothing about people who may have been in the tower all along.

3) Since we don't know to what extent the dream reflects the reality, it cannot be ruled out that the chronology of events was actually reversed and that the KG only fought when they were unable to convince Ned to let them take Jon. - I consider this scenario less likely than the KG not wanting anyone near Lyanna, but, who knows.

27 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

There are witnesses to Lyanna's death, and I'm presuming this is how we'll be fed the truth in a future book - from one of the witnesses.

I believe there is a fair chance we have already heard about one, and perhaps only, witness - Wylla. The only person we know to actively participate in the scheme to cover Jon's true identity by claiming she is his mother. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/16/2019 at 11:04 AM, Feather Crystal said:

I'm sure anything I say to this won't be satisfactory, so I'm going to take a bit of time to come up with something good! LOL :D

You know what niggles in my brain when I consider whether or not Ned did fight the Kingsguard down in the Prince's Pass? How he could have explained why they were there. Since we're going that route, we're presuming his promise was to keep Jon's true parentage a secret. His backstory for Jon is that Wylla is his mother and that he met her - where? Catelyn just says 'on campaign'. If people know that Ned killed the Kingsguard in the Prince's Pass, why hasn't anybody questioned the reason why they stayed back when everybody believes Rhaenys and Aegon were killed in Kings Landing? It shouldn't take three Kingsguard to hold Lyanna hostage, and it wouldn't make sense to keep holding her hostage when the war was lost, so what possible reason could Ned give for the Kingsguard being there without also giving Jon's parentage away?

I don't see why it would be up to Ned to explain any of this. Ned heard she was at the ToJ. When he arrived, he found the three KG. They fought, the KG died, Ned and HR survived. The explanation as to why they were there would have to come from Rhaegar or Arys, both of whom are dead. So Ned, like everyone else, would just assume they were there guarding Rhaegar's mad obsession, Lyanna. If anyone is not satisfied with that answer, there is no reason to expect Ned would know anything different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading through TWoI&F again and ran across this crystal clear comment about the number of Kingsguard in King's Landing during the sack.

Quote

When Prince Rhaegar at last marched up the kingsroad to the Trident, with him were all but one of the Kingsguard who had remained in King's Landing: Ser Barristan the Bold, Ser Jonothor Darry, and Prince Lewyn of Dorne. Prince Lewyn took command of the Dornish troop sent by his nephew, the Prince Doran, but it is said that he did so only after threats from the Mad King, who feared the Dornishmen looked to betray him. Only the young Ser Jaime Lannister remained in King's Landing. (TWoI&F 128) bold emphasis added

Just another piece of clear evidence pointing to Hightower, Dayne, and Whent not being in King's Landing during this period.

Now, perhaps somehow the trio sneaks into King's Landing after the Trident, but that doesn't explain why the seventeen year old Jaime is left in charge of the Red Keep's defenses if vastly more experienced Kingsguard are on hand, nor why Jaime doesn't remember them being there, or why Ned buries the three in the Prince's Pass at the Tower of Joy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the quote. I hope the matter can be put to rest now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Mullocose said:

Were the King's Guard @ the ToJ because they had been delivering the real Aegon (Sam Tarley) to Horn Hill?

?????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎4‎/‎5‎/‎2019 at 5:26 PM, nyser1 said:

If Rhaegar is dead and Aerys is dead, what do you believe was the point of the fight here? Why did the Kingsguard not tell Ned the truth instead of fighting to the death?

The King's Guard is suppose to die for their king , even though Barrie may be grateful for Bobbie B. he eventually felt that he shouldn't have taken Bob's pardon .

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

×