Jump to content
anjulibai

The purpose of R+L=J?

Recommended Posts

47 minutes ago, Ilissa said:

The prince that was promised stopped both threats - ice and fire.

It is a great statement. I wonder if showrunners or GRRM did it on purpose or it has been serendipity for them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It had no purpose. Everything could have been exactly the same if Jon had been Aerys' bastard. Or Robert's bastard. I mean, Gendry was legitimized, why not Jon?

Just imagine if Jon had been just Ned's bastard instead of Rhaegar's son: you could have any character saying "Jon, it doesn't matter who was your father or mother, but how people follow you" and actually say "well, the kid's a Stark, so that's the important" and it would haev worked. Dany could have gone mad by seeing how some bastard was doing things better than her and how people followed Jon.

Jon being a Targaryen won't give him any extra power, but it exists to create a conflict and a parallel in books. He's the ACTUAL son of Rhaegar but probably can't prove it, while Aegon is likely NOT Rhaegar's son, but he can "prove it". Jon will know of his heritage and others will eventually find out. That creates another conflict for many characters, including Dany herself. Not everything is made to make the characters powerful or badasses, it's to create conflict between themselves and others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Years ago I wondered somewhere here on some thread if Jon would finally learn who he was, and we readers would as well, but that the world of Westeros would not, and would not know what he had done.  That seems very plausible in Martin's writing.  It seemed so years ago, it seems so now.  But in the show - the way D and D painted things - it is just so, so, so flat.  I usually like Kit Harrington, but this season gave him literally nothing other than the dialogue of a ball-less bastard.  It was so blase.  What they gave Dany this entire season was horrible as well.  Rushed, and seemed implausible given how they'd painted her over years and years - and since Jon's arc, in the end, was dependent on hers, it just fell so, so flat.  They really needed a few more episodes.

They could have painted together how it was the Song of Ice and Fire - and how Jon Snow was the Prince who was Promised.  Even if he didn't end up in power at the end, and even if Westeros didn't know it.  Bran said at the end to Jon he was "where he needed to be" but my husband and I had a good laugh that maybe Bran had been engineering his ascendancy from the beginning... I mean, come on.  There we have Jon saying, "Your Grace..." and bending the knee, and Bran knowing that while he's been nominated, Jon really is king by all rights and laws of that sort of world - other than by the right of conquest, which Bran has not accomplished either.

And what was Bran's purpose at all?  Relevant to this thread because he had the big reveal about Jon's parentage-- but again, why is Jon's parentage important at all?  It's a magical world... and we don't really feel at all any kind of relevance in the Song of Ice and Fire with Jon other than he warned people many many episodes ago and then, yes, kills Dany. 

So back to R and L -- and why it mattered.  Definitely, the TV series hasn't shown us anything of WHY it mattered.  They could have, but rushed the ending - and I don't understand why.  They had so, so much money.  They could have wrapped this up properly with an entire season, but even just three more episodes would have done wonders.  

Hopefully Martin, before he is 96, will give us an ending we deserve - wrapping up the loose ties and making a cohesive whole (which D and D were, unfortunately, woefully unable to do).    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SansaJonRule said:

Jon was the one that brought awareness of the NK's imminent attack and rallied everyone together to fight it.

And then the best he could do was shout at the ice dragon :D

2 hours ago, GeorgeIAF said:

Come on ... Arya's training was the reason she was in a position to kill the NK. Also Melisandre has a line about blue eyes you'll shut down forever earlier in the series.

Did her training involve screaming when trying to backstab someone?

They could have at least make it a team effort - Jon distracting NK in a fight to give Arya a stabbing chance.

 

As for the OP's question: it served next to no purpose. Jon apparently didn't want to contest with Dany and the one guy what wanted to push Jon's claim got roasted before he could do any damage. Damn, if they actually let Varys go through with it and create some real tension, with some real challenge that could have pushed Dany over the edge... But Jon was the poular guy even without anyone knowing, and he didn't even brood over it that much, so there was zero payoff on the personal level, either.

That said: I guess it is possible that this might be GRRM's subversion of the hidden prince - instead of being a good thing welcome by everyone the character included, the secret parentage will only become a huge problem in an already volatile situation. Only, I have no doubt that GRRM's execution will be truly gutwrenching instead of this snoozefest.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Learn your lesson well:

An outcast stays an outcast. No matter how brave he is. No matter how selfless he is. No matter how much personal happiness he sacrifices for a greater purpose. No matter what fierce a warrior he is.

In the finale the outcast ends an outcast. A bastard. Someone who is punished for all the good he did. Who is for ever banned from better society. Someone who is sent into the cold.

Outcasts should never ever try. A bastard is always sent back to where he always belonged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the series it's just for shock effect, but what would GRRM do with this revelation?

I presume the bannermen from the North will never learn this information (and that GRRM explicitly told D&D), but what other implications would it have? Perhaps Dany will brood over it for several chapters and slowly distrust Jon. So he will be labeled a traitor like in the show, funny thing is she turned 180 in the last episode just before being stabbed. What was that?

Share this post


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

This

Also Drogon not roasting his ass after he killed Dany

 As if that were necessary. How often was Dany far enough away from Drogon that he couldn't do anything?

Share this post


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

Jon was the one that brought awareness of the NK's imminent attack and rallied everyone together to fight it.

R+L=J also gave the viewers something else to speculate on.

Uh, okay, but how did the Night King actually die? His army did nothing. All Jon really had to do was alert Arya, and Bran could have done it. 

as for fire, he only killed Dany not the dragon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JonCon's Red Beard said:

Jon being a Targaryen won't give him any extra power

It gave him the power to ride a dragon. Which didn't amount to anything but burning some zombies and endearing him to Dany. 

I guess it's also the reason he wasn't roasted by Drogon, and why he was able to be alone with Dany. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Howling Mad said:

Could not agree more. Glad Jon left Castle Black to become King of the Free Folk. Too bad Ygrett is not with him.

Remember when Jon met Tormund? Jon was forced to witness some of the heinous things Wildlings would do; raid villages, slaughter innocent families and children (Defending Tormund was the only reason Ollie ever turned on Jon).  While what societies and groups beyond the wall did may have been considered commonplace, Jon detested all of it. Notice how he killed a friendly at King's Landing for trying to ravage that woman? It's those little moments that make Jon Snow likable.

Jon was also subjected to Thenns (a bunch of cannibals everyone hated). So Jon's just going to say; "Hey, we're all at peace with Winterfell, so from now on; no more killing, no more pillaging, no more cannibalism-- no more this, no more that, and so on, and everyone will go along with it.

Jon's story not only ended up being terrible (the same with Daenerys'), but based on his personality, Jon ended up in the worst place of all.

Edited by Nihiloth90

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was no reason what-so-ever as far as I can tell. Hell, Jon even rode a dragon before finding out he was a Targaryen. I guess Bran just wanted to be King, so he had one contender for the throne kill the other one, and then send the remaining contender to what is essentially prison. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As others have said, it has no purpose.   I just wonder how long ago D&D decided Jon's ending was to travel beyond the Wall with nothing to do.  Seems if they knew that from season 1 they could have just skipped out R+L=J entirely.

I guess 10 years ago they decided a bunch of plot points they wanted to include from the books, and at some point they realised they can't do them all justice.  The first few seasons were incredible and very similar to the books, but maybe they could have been dumbed down a bit to stop them having to dumb down the last few seasons so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was what made Dany go over the edge, although I think there will be a better set up in the books.  Plus it's the only reason Drogon didn't kill him

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It served no purpose in the show, just like the death and resurrection of Jon Snow.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

R&L=J is opportunity to subvert the "hidden heir" trope. 

Instead of inheriting the Throne, the rightful heir is exiled as a murderer and oath breaker.  

On paper it's a nice twist...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Nihiloth90 said:

Remember when Jon met Tormund? Jon was forced to witness some of the heinous things Wildlings would do; raid villages, slaughter innocent families and children (Defending Tormund was the only reason Ollie ever turned on Jon).  While what societies and groups beyond the wall did may have been considered commonplace, Jon detested all of it. Notice how he killed a friendly at King's Landing for trying to ravage that woman? It's those little moments that make Jon Snow likable.

Jon was also subjected to Thenns (a bunch of cannibals everyone hated). So Jon's just going to say; "Hey, we're all at peace with Winterfell, so from now on; no more killing, no more pillaging, no more cannibalism-- no more this, no more that, and so on, and everyone will go along with it.

Jon's story not only ended up being terrible (the same with Daenerys'), but based on his personality, Jon ended up in the worst place of all.

He made peace with them now but eventually they might go back to their old ways. I think Jon should stay at the Wall. I know people seem to think he is better off beyond the wall. 

Share this post


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

Say what now? Who's that?

Drogon is still out there. 

Drogon is not dangerous without dragonlord.

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

×