Jump to content
Black Crow

Heresy 225 and the Snowflakes of Doom

Recommended Posts

53 minutes ago, corbon said:

Its nothing personal, sorry if it seems I'm picking on you. 
Essentially you made a supporting argument for the theory that there may not be three dragon riders. This particular argument was bad. That does NOT invalidate the theory, which I am neither attacking nor defending. There are other arguments, for and against,

An illogical assumption was made, and went unchallenged. It often seems things that question 'dogma' are not themselves questioned, so long as they support 'heresy'.

(I come here for 'visits' when time allows - often threads have moved a dozen or more pages since I last visited, so I don't have time to read everything. But I see this a lot, along with crowing about how everything is questioned here and everyone else are idiots). From an 'outsider's pov this is quite an uncomfortable place, but I like to visit anyway when I can because there are different perspectives on things here that are interesting, and not the way I think, more so than in the main forum area.

 

What did you think about the crows-eye stuff? I'm not sold on it (other theories could be true, or new data may come to light invalidating it, but I think its a very solid (by far the most solid at this point) explanation of all the facts regarding Euron's eye/history.

Well, I am something of a unicorn being and INTJ woman if you're familiar with the Myers-Brigg Type Indicator.  I am very  high on the intuitive scale. That's having completed that assessment three times over 20 years with the same result.   My argument may not be well formed at this stage but I think I'll stick with it.  For now.  I have been known to change my mind.  I do question everything, it's just in my nature.  I like to entertain various possibilities. 

I don't read everything on the general forum either.  But I do read your comments.  I'm sorry you don't feel comfortable here.  I don't think you are an idiot.  Far from it.

I'll get back to you on the stuff about Euron's eye/history, but I think we're on the same page here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, corbon said:

Euron's 'normal' eye is blue. 
His sigil has a red eye.
His nickname is "crows eye".
His patched eye is black.
Crows are born with blue-grey eyes which turn dark red/brown as they mature.

I believe Euron has a hyphema, must likely caused by blunt force trauma (could indeed be the cliff fall, or combat later). Initially it coloured his eye red ("crows eye", blue to red).
When it does not clear, the blood can turn thicken and turn black and vision damage can be permanent.
Hyphema symptoms can include pain (hence the drinking etc) and sensitivity to light, as well as loss of vision (hence the patch).

If the trauma happened before Theon was born then as far as Theon is concerned Euron's black eye 'was always like that'.

This sounds right to me.  Why do you suppose he switches between the red and black eye patches?  What do you make of Euron's personal sigil?

Edited by LynnS

Share this post


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

Sure. Thats not the point.

Exactly what he said.
He could/should have been i) or ii). But he's failed, too old, etc. The citadel should send Dany ii)

You went straight from that to ii) = i). Which is not a logical or reasonable deduction.

Those assumptions are not being made here, nor relevant to the question.

Sure. No ones arguing anything to do with there being three dragon riders.

Sure, its possible. Still nothing to do with the question here, or your assumption.

Its nothing personal, sorry if it seems I'm picking on you. 
Essentially you made a supporting argument for the theory that there may not be three dragon riders. This particular argument was bad. That does NOT invalidate the theory, which I am neither attacking nor defending. There are other arguments, for and against,

An illogical assumption was made, and went unchallenged. It often seems things that question 'dogma' are not themselves questioned, so long as they support 'heresy'.

(I come here for 'visits' when time allows - often threads have moved a dozen or more pages since I last visited, so I don't have time to read everything. But I see this a lot, along with crowing about how everything is questioned here and everyone else are idiots). From an 'outsider's pov this is quite an uncomfortable place, but I like to visit anyway when I can because there are different perspectives on things here that are interesting, and not the way I think, more so than in the main forum area.

 

What did you think about the crows-eye stuff? I'm not sold on it (other theories could be true, or new data may come to light invalidating it, but I think its a very solid (by far the most solid at this point) explanation of all the facts regarding Euron's eye/history.

When I don’t have my own theory on a particular point or don’t see any glaring reason to disagree with a theory - especially if I don’t know of any text that would clearly discredit someone’s idea, I don’t call somebody out simply to be disagreeable, which is how your comments read to me.

My understanding of what LynnS said was that she has doubts that the three heads have to be related dragon riders and she brought up some good points.

1) Rhaegar thought his children could become the three heads if he had one more child, but he never even had living dragons!

2) The Targaryens were looking for three siblings, and since Rhaella suffered through several miscarriages and stillborns after Viserys, it may have looked like she was never going to produce a third that would live. It’s probably why Rhaegar and Aemon thought that the prophecy must have applied to his children.

3) Aegon was married to his sisters. Daenerys doesn’t have living brothers to marry. Even if Jon turns out to be Rhaegar’s son, he’s not her brother - he’d be her nephew, and if he’s to be her husband, who is the other one?

4) If Jon is Rhaegar’s son, he’s missing two siblings too! Rhaenys and Aegon are dead!

I think concluding that Daenerys will marry two men and fulfill the requirements for the “three heads” IS the “jump”. It doesn’t follow precedent, and there aren’t enough existing factors for it to materialize.

Share this post


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

Well, I am something of a unicorn being and INTJ woman if you're familiar with the Myers-Brigg Type Indicator.  I am very  high on the intuitive scale. That's having completed that assessment three times over 20 years with the same result.  

I don't recall the names of various such systems I've done, but I'm basically the opposite. Something like 90/85 Melancholic/Phlegmatic (out of 4 types, under whatever very old system that was). Mostly logic and practical, little else.
Which is why I like visiting here. There's a high proportion of people that are opposite to me and see things and connections that I don't, that are interesting. I don't always (often) agree with many of the conclusions, but thats no surprise. Its still interesting.

Most amazing to me is that GRRM's work is able to so deeply fascinate and resonate with such completely opposite people in different ways. Thats an incredible testament.

2 hours ago, LynnS said:

My argument may not be well formed at this stage but I think I'll stick with it.  For now.  I have been known to change my mind.  I do question everything, it's just in my nature.  I like to entertain various possibilities. 

It is quite simple.
Aegon could have been i) (head of the dragon or ii) (counselor etc). But cannot.
He says the citadel needs to send Dany ii).

That allows for the possibility (among many) that ii)=i) but does not create the assertion that ii)=i).
Dragon heads may be counselors but counselors need not be dragon heads.
Instead you jumped to the assertion that a counselor must be a dragon head ("so it seems...dragon head does not equal rider, it equals counselor") - at least, thats the only way the second quote, about the citadel needing to send Dany a counselor, is relevant.

Quote

So it seems that being one of the heads of the dragon has nothing to do with riding a dragon, but counseling, teaching and protecting.  Who is showing her the way?

 

2 hours ago, LynnS said:

I don't read everything on the general forum either.  But I do read your comments.  I'm sorry you don't feel comfortable here.  I don't think you are an idiot.  Far from it.

Oh, I know its not personal. But there are exponential more snide general comments here about non heretics than there are elsewhere about heretics. Which is the opposite of the self-group-image.

 

 

2 hours ago, LynnS said:

This sounds right to me.  Why do you suppose he switches between the red and black eye patches?  What do you make of Euron's personal sigil?

Well, remember I'm the boring, logical, practical (well, intellectually at least, I'm not much good with a screwdriver!) type (not entirely, I'm a flawed and partially irrational and impractical person just like everyone else - thats how humans are) but its how I come across in real life and even more so on a keyboard I guess. I'm the guy that no one asks to buy coffees any more because when the vendor asked what type the reply was "don;t know, don't care (I don't drink it), wasn;t give info, 3 off whatever is most common

Mostly, I think the red and black patches are unimportant. Like having multiple different shirts, or breeches, or cloaks.
Possibly he uses them to show mood, or to be more or less scary to people. Note the black one was in public at the kingsmoot, the red one in private with a woman. Thats about as far as my imagination can reach on its own. ;)
Possibly GRRM just made an error that didn't get caught because it doesn't have to be an error.
Possibly he had the red one earlier when his eye was red, and got a black one when it darkened. 

I'm sure there are more interesting theories here. I'll think mine are more likely to be right, but agree the others are more interesting. Some will be logically flawed (and I'll internally dismiss them) and others will be logically coherent, they just aren't ideas I'm capable of formulating because I don't think that way.

Personal sigil?
Euron's personal coat-of-arms is a red eye with a black pupil beneath a black iron crown supported by two crows

I think its obviously  a sigil he's made for himself, rather than one he was born to. 
I guess the Black crown is an obvious reference to the Iron Crown worn by the Greyjoy kings from which he is descended.
The crows and the red eye are obvious references to his nickname. He's Euron Crow's-Eye.

I would guess that on his first voyage, or first as captain, (could have been earlier or later, but it seems to fit better that it would be attached to actively winning a leadership place, which implies to me, on a voyage given what we see of Ironborn culture) he took the blow that caused his hyphema. Probably in a significant fight. That gave him the nickname - blue eye to red, just like a crow. When he had enough renown, either already by then (I think most likely as a result of the same fight he took the blow) or later, he formed his sigil to match the nickname.

This is very much speculation. Not a 'theory' as such, that I would argue against others. But it seems to me to fit best with all the known facts, and Ironmen culture.

I'm sure GRRM is aware of the three-eyed crow symbolism, but to me it looks like the sort of coincidence he delights in that helps confuse his mysteries, while having a very practical and simple background behind it.
I wouldn't say the 3eyed crow type ideas are wrong, I just see a much more practical and simple answer.

Sorry, all very mundane here... :D

1 hour ago, Feather Crystal said:

When I don’t have my own theory on a particular point or don’t see any glaring reason to disagree with a theory - especially if I don’t know of any text that would clearly discredit someone’s idea, I don’t call somebody out simply to be disagreeable, which is how your comments read to me.

Well, I don't mean to be disagreeable. I didn't disagree with the overall theory  or general thrust of the conversation, only a logical fallacy used to support it.
If someone says A+B=C and then runs with it, but A+B in fact could = C, or D, or E, then I think it only reasonable to point out that C is not a reliable inference.

1 hour ago, Feather Crystal said:

My understanding of what LynnS said was that she has doubts that the three heads have to be related dragon riders and she brought up some good points.

She had the same understanding, which is why this dragged out a bit. She went back to this, which I never addressed at all.
I'm not arguing for or against that.
I just point out that one of the points, the only one I addressed (I don't even remember if there were others, just had the logical fallacy jar me) was NOT a good point.
And that no one was bothered by the logical fallacy in the argument. Why? Why wasn't it questioned? Everything is supposed to be!

1 hour ago, Feather Crystal said:

1) Rhaegar thought his children could become the three heads if he had one more child, but he never even had living dragons!

2) The Targaryens were looking for three siblings, and since Rhaella suffered through several miscarriages and stillborns after Viserys, it may have looked like she was never going to produce a third that would live. It’s probably why Rhaegar and Aemon thought that the prophecy must have applied to his children.

3) Aegon was married to his sisters. Daenerys doesn’t have living brothers to marry. Even if Jon turns out to be Rhaegar’s son, he’s not her brother - he’d be her nephew, and if he’s to be her husband, who is the other one?

4) If Jon is Rhaegar’s son, he’s missing two siblings too! Rhaenys and Aegon are dead!

I think concluding that Daenerys will marry two men and fulfill the requirements for the “three heads” IS the “jump”. It doesn’t follow precedent, and there aren’t enough existing factors for it to materialize.

Thats a whole other argument I don't want to get into!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do have a recollection of an SSM in which GRRM said that the third head of the dragon need not be a Targaryen 

Share this post


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

I don't recall the names of various such systems I've done, but I'm basically the opposite. Something like 90/85 Melancholic/Phlegmatic (out of 4 types, under whatever very old system that was). Mostly logic and practical, little else.
Which is why I like visiting here. There's a high proportion of people that are opposite to me and see things and connections that I don't, that are interesting. I don't always (often) agree with many of the conclusions, but thats no surprise. Its still interesting.

Most amazing to me is that GRRM's work is able to so deeply fascinate and resonate with such completely opposite people in different ways. Thats an incredible testament.

LOL!  I'm satisfied with your explanation.  I don't have a theory per se; my inquiry is exploratory in nature.  I do get that your nature is primarily logical and sensing.  People do collect and process information in different ways.  I'm fascinated that there are people on the forums who can hold vast amounts of detail about bloodlines. Or can answer questions about the size of Euron's fleet, for example.  That stuff just falls right out of my head. It's still interesting.  However, stuff that I consider to be overly romanticized is something that I tend to dismiss. 

Generally, I think that the main sources of conflict on the board have to do with how members process information or how we come to closure.  I don't have closure on many ideas, while others are exacerbated by the notion that some things are closed and can't be questioned any longer.  I don't mind that people disagree.  After all, it's just a friendly discussion.

   

Share this post


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

I do have a recollection of an SSM in which GRRM said that the third head of the dragon need not be a Targaryen 

Me too.  Which is interesting because it implies that there will be three dragon riders.  I'd say Victarion is one and Tyrion is the other.  But I don't think this is the sole meaning of the dragon has three heads or even the most relevant.

Share this post


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

Me too.  Which is interesting because it implies that there will be three dragon riders.  I'd say Victarion is one and Tyrion is the other.  But I don't think this is the sole meaning of the dragon has three heads or even the most relevant.

I think the Targaryens were looking for:

1) A descendent of Aerys and Rhaella, who

2) Would have two siblings, and

3) The three would marry, and 

4) Produce the prince that was promised, which means they’d be able to successfully hatch three dragons that they would bond with and ride.

Daenerys is Aerys and Rhaella’s daughter and Aemon declared her the princess that was promised, but her siblings are dead, so now characters and readers assume that the prophecy will still be fulfilled through marriage to Targaryen bastards or taking on learned advisors. I think the prophecy has been “frustrated” for lack of a better word. It cannot be fulfilled to the letter, but that doesn’t mean that it won’t morph or be expressed in an unexpected way. The dragons have hatched, but maybe there will be three people controlling  a single dragon. :dunno:

Share this post


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

Generally, I think that the main sources of conflict on the board have to do with how members process information or how we come to closure.  I don't have closure on many ideas, while others are exacerbated by the notion that some things are closed and can't be questioned any longer.

Yes, this is well phrased.  Recently, for instance, this comment was posted elsewhere:

Quote

When Lyanna unexpectedly gave birth to a boy she would've wondered what Rhaegar would've wanted him named, obviously. There is an answer to that question. Because Rhaegar had already chosen the name for his son and heir, which Lyanna's child now was. Consider Lyanna's motivations and her PoV instead of your own fan-wanking and headcanon.

Yet the objective canonical facts are:

1. We can't demonstrate where Lyanna was at any time in the Rebellion, even for one day

2. We also can't demonstrate her company, or how she spent her time, over that same period

3. We can't demonstrate that she had a baby (half-assed attempts based on the phrase "bed of blood" being ludicrously inadequate)

Thus it is effectively impossible to "consider Lyanna's motivations and her PoV," if we are being, to use a popular phrase from another place, intellectually honest. 

All we can really do is speculate idly.

The extraordinary level of conclusion long-jumping in the above leads directly to the snide condescension we see in the boldfaced sentence.  Yet it's not atypical for this site, either.  I could cite hundreds of similar examples, going back many years, involving dozens of posters.

This in turn is what led to Heresy, not as a thread to discuss a fixed, coherent theory, but as a thread that abstractly admits the objective truth is difficult to discern, given an author as aggressively ambiguous as GRRM, and positing that we should be wary of arriving at false conclusions based on flimsy or nonexistent information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally think the explanation that the heads of a dragon = dragon riders is a tad prosaic, for GRRM at least.  I mean we've seen dragon riders, and there have been a ton of dragon riders in the past, especially among Targaryens.  But I also don't think it's as mundane as a counselor either.

So looking at the nature of magic in these books (especially magic centered around Westeros) ask yourselves, what magical feat have we never seen before?  After all, Aemon said that they have been trying to piece together this puzzle for at least a 1,000 years.  Dragon riders and counselors have come and gone in a thousand years.  But what we haven 't seen is someone who's consciousness has entered and melded with that of a dragon.

My thought is that being the head of a dragon may be more literal than we think.  The head = the consciousness of the dragon.  

After all, it seems to be an obsession among some Targaryens about dying and being reborn as a dragon.

So the question is, what is the process that this transformation could occur?

I think the opening of Bran's third eye might be a clue.  We have Bran surviving a near death experience before his latent telepathic powers were fully awakened.  Powers which were awakened while Bran lay in his sick bed.

Now do we have a recent example of a Targaryen or Targaryen descendant who had a similar fate?

Let's turn to Quentyn Martell, who may not be a Targaryen (even though I have a theory that he may very well be Elia's son Aegon), but he is descendant from a Targaryen line.

So Quentyn gets himself burned, but interestingly enough he doesn't die right away.  Instead Martin puts him in a sick bed for a time where he is tended to by Missendei (an interesting character who appears to hear the scratching of the dragons in their pit, when no one else could).  

Perhaps like Bran, Quentyn's extended period, hovering between the thin line of life and death triggered the opening of his third eye, which in turn allowed him to come in telepathic contact with one of the two dragons left in Mereen.

So when it came time for Quentyn's mortal body to finally expire, his consciousness finally let go and took up a permanent residence inside one of the dragons.  Perhaps making Quentyn the first actual head of the dragon.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:

I personally think the explanation that the heads of a dragon = dragon riders is a tad prosaic, for GRRM at least.  I mean we've seen dragon riders, and there have been a ton of dragon riders in the past, especially among Targaryens.  But I also don't think it's as mundane as a counselor either.

So looking at the nature of magic in these books (especially magic centered around Westeros) ask yourselves, what magical feat have we never seen before?  After all, Aemon said that they have been trying to piece together this puzzle for at least a 1,000 years.  Dragon riders and counselors have come and gone in a thousand years.  But what we haven 't seen is someone who's consciousness has entered and melded with that of a dragon.

My thought is that being the head of a dragon may be more literal than we think.  The head = the consciousness of the dragon.  

After all, it seems to be an obsession among some Targaryens about dying and being reborn as a dragon.

So the question is, what is the process that this transformation could occur?

I think the opening of Bran's third eye might be a clue.  We have Bran surviving a near death experience before his latent telepathic powers were fully awakened.  Powers which were awakened while Bran lay in his sick bed.

Now do we have a recent example of a Targaryen or Targaryen descendant who had a similar fate?

Let's turn to Quentyn Martell, who may not be a Targaryen (even though I have a theory that he may very well be Elia's son Aegon), but he is descendant from a Targaryen line.

So Quentyn gets himself burned, but interestingly enough he doesn't die right away.  Instead Martin puts him in a sick bed for a time where he is tended to by Missendei (an interesting character who appears to hear the scratching of the dragons in their pit, when no one else could).  

Perhaps like Bran, Quentyn's extended period, hovering between the thin line of life and death triggered the opening of his third eye, which in turn allowed him to come in telepathic contact with one of the two dragons left in Mereen.

So when it came time for Quentyn's mortal body to finally expire, his consciousness finally let go and took up a permanent residence inside one of the dragons.  Perhaps making Quentyn the first actual head of the dragon.

 

This is a good idea, however I think there are already human spirits inside the dragons. Do you think each dragon needs three human consciousnesses?

Drogon seems to have Khal Drogo's consciousness, but this is also the dragon that Dany seems to be bonded to the most. She herself may be an undead creature and part of her own consciousness may be in there too.

Dany named Viserion after her brother Viserys. I guess his consciousness could have gone into the egg, but Mirri may be in there too.

Rhaegal was named after her brother Rhaegar. I don't know how the egg could have captured his consciousness, but her stillborn son Rhaego may be in there. Rhaegal was the dragon that bathed Quentyn Martell with fire, so if your theory is correct, Qyentyn's consciousness may be inside Rhaegal.

Edited by Feather Crystal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:

I personally think the explanation that the heads of a dragon = dragon riders is a tad prosaic, for GRRM at least.  I mean we've seen dragon riders, and there have been a ton of dragon riders in the past, especially among Targaryens.  But I also don't think it's as mundane as a counselor either.

So looking at the nature of magic in these books (especially magic centered around Westeros) ask yourselves, what magical feat have we never seen before?  After all, Aemon said that they have been trying to piece together this puzzle for at least a 1,000 years.  Dragon riders and counselors have come and gone in a thousand years.  But what we haven 't seen is someone who's consciousness has entered and melded with that of a dragon.

My thought is that being the head of a dragon may be more literal than we think.  The head = the consciousness of the dragon.  

 

Awesome!  I have the same idea, only I think Rhaegar is the singing dragon of Dany's dream, now reborn as Drogon in exchange for Rheagal's life.

Quote

A Game of Thrones - Daenerys III

Day followed day, and night followed night, until Dany knew she could not endure a moment longer. She would kill herself rather than go on, she decided one night …

Yet when she slept that night, she dreamt the dragon dream again. Viserys was not in it this time. There was only her and the dragon. Its scales were black as night, wet and slick with blood. Her blood, Dany sensed. Its eyes were pools of molten magma, and when it opened its mouth, the flame came roaring out in a hot jet. She could hear it singing to her. She opened her arms to the fire, embraced it, let it swallow her whole, let it cleanse her and temper her and scour her clean. She could feel her flesh sear and blacken and slough away, could feel her blood boil and turn to steam, and yet there was no pain. She felt strong and new and fierce.

 Dany dreams of being Rhaegar, wearing his armor and becoming the dragon and this dream:

Quote

A Storm of Swords - Daenerys III

That night she dreamt that she was Rhaegar, riding to the Trident. But she was mounted on a dragon, not a horse. When she saw the Usurper's rebel host across the river they were armored all in ice, but she bathed them in dragonfire and they melted away like dew and turned the Trident into a torrent. Some small part of her knew that she was dreaming, but another part exulted. This is how it was meant to be. The other was a nightmare, and I have only now awakened.

This is very strange.  Which part of her is exulting, which has a memory of the Trident?  This seems to me to be a separate consciousness from Dany.

Quote

A Game of Thrones - Daenerys IX

"… the dragon …"

And saw her brother Rhaegar, mounted on a stallion as black as his armor. Fire glimmered red through the narrow eye slit of his helm. "The last dragon," Ser Jorah's voice whispered faintly. "The last, the last." Dany lifted his polished black visor. The face within was her own.

I've said before that while identity of the Great Wolf in the tent ritual is hidden from Dany; she can see the man limned in flame (the Great Dragon) without his dragon body.

 

Share this post


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

Most amazing to me is that GRRM's work is able to so deeply fascinate and resonate with such completely opposite people in different ways. Thats an incredible testament.

It really is! 

 

5 hours ago, LynnS said:

Generally, I think that the main sources of conflict on the board have to do with how members process information or how we come to closure.  I don't have closure on many ideas, while others are exacerbated by the notion that some things are closed and can't be questioned any longer.  I don't mind that people disagree.  After all, it's just a friendly discussion.

Sometimes I read other peoples thoughts and am blown away by their perception into details that never struck me as odd at all, or on things I never focused on because I am so busy focusing on something else. And I know I focus on things that some people probably think are silly or mundane. That is one of the great things about the broad interests and abilities in the fandom. That we all can help other people see different perspectives. We don't have to buy those perspectives but at least we can have our eyes open to the possibilities that lie within the text.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, St Daga said:

Sometimes I read other peoples thoughts and am blown away by their perception into details that never struck me as odd at all, or on things I never focused on because I am so busy focusing on something else. And I know I focus on things that some people probably think are silly or mundane. That is one of the great things about the broad interests and abilities in the fandom. That we all can help other people see different perspectives. We don't have to buy those perspectives but at least we can have our eyes open to the possibilities that lie within the text.

Yes, I respect how other people engage with the story for their enjoyment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, LynnS said:
Quote

A Storm of Swords - Daenerys III

That night she dreamt that she was Rhaegar, riding to the Trident. But she was mounted on a dragon, not a horse. When she saw the Usurper's rebel host across the river they were armored all in ice, but she bathed them in dragonfire and they melted away like dew and turned the Trident into a torrent. Some small part of her knew that she was dreaming, but another part exulted. This is how it was meant to be. The other was a nightmare, and I have only now awakened.

This is very strange.  Which part of her is exulting, which has a memory of the Trident?  This seems to me to be a separate consciousness from Dany.

I believe this passage is evidence that there were forces at play that were trying to prevent the prince that was promised prophecy from coming true. I know it's a round about way, but the passage that you've shared seems like Rhaegar's consciousness is inside Daenerys and they both realize that they were robbed of a victory on the Trident.

There was a significant gap between Rhaegar and Viserys and a very long gap between Viserys and Daenerys. I think we may need to consider that all of Rhaella's miscarriages, stillborns, and infant deaths may have actually been the results of sabotage. Perhaps someone was poisoning Rhaella so that she and Aerys would never have three children?

During my chapter analysis of the titled chapters, which I believe are chapters that tell two stories - one of the present and one from the past - I came across a passage that didn't make sense to me a few years ago, but make more sense now with regards to the possibility of Rhaella's offspring being poisoned. Here's the passage:

 

Quote

A Feast for Crows - The Captain Of Guards

"Obara?"
 
"Tyene. Obara is too loud. Tyene is so sweet and gentle that no man will suspect her. Obara would make Oldtown our father's funeral pyre, but I am not so greedy. Four lives will suffice for me. Lord Tywin's golden twins, as payment for Elia's children. The old lion, for Elia herself. And last of all the little king, for my father."
 
"The boy has never wronged us."
 
 
During this same conversation, Nymeria also brought up that Ser Daemon informed her of the poison that Oberyn used on the spear that tickled Gregor. The implication being that Tyene would be able to poison Cersei, Jaime, Tywin, and Tommen and no one would ever suspect her, because she is so sweet and gentle. The inversion parallel for the past suggests that there was a person in court using poison as a weapon. 
 
Rhaella's miscarriages, etc became so troubling that Aerys began to suspect her of affairs and/or killing her own children, so he had her sleep with two septas to keep her pregnancies safe. Is it possible the "sweet and gentle" septas are to blame?
Edited by Feather Crystal

Share this post


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

This is very strange.  Which part of her is exulting, which has a memory of the Trident?  This seems to me to be a separate consciousness from Dany.

No part of her has an actual memory of the Trident. But this is part of her family story, both historically and mystically. 

She's just dreaming a triumphal dream the way her family history should have gone. If Rhaegar had of had a dragon he would have won, surely. And since she has dragons, she can take his place, be the hero he should have been. 

The rebels clad in ice though shows that there is more to it than just the prosaic. She clearly has clearly a (sub?)consciousness of the greater battle, the reason for the three heads/prophecy etc. That wasn't just Rhaegar fighting the rebels, a purely human struggle, it was als the real struggle, with dragons, against the ice-clad, with the three heads/prophecy etc.

Amid the "yeah baby, this is how it should have been" feeling is the awareness that its actually just a dream. No surprise there.

I, of course, see much less in it than most.  And back my reading as more likely, the others as more interesting. :blush:

The question for me, is does this indicate that Dany has a deeper understanding of the three heads/prophecy/line of Aerys and Rhaella etc than we've been led to believe? I for one thought she had only a relatively superficial '3 heads' idea based more on Aegon the Conqueror and the Targaryen symbols and phrase than, for example, the sort of knowledge that Aemon and Rhaegar had.
We know she reads a lot. What has she been reading? More than Jorah's old books, I bet.

Or is it 'outside' understanding from a mystical source? I know which idea will be popular here. :P

Share this post


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

This is a good idea, however I think there are already human spirits inside the dragons. Do you think each dragon needs three human consciousnesses?

Drogon seems to have Khal Drogo's consciousness, but this is also the dragon that Dany seems to be bonded to the most. She herself may be an undead creature and part of her own consciousness may be in there too.

Dany named Viserion after her brother Viserys. I guess his consciousness could have gone into the egg, but Mirri may be in there too.

Rhaegal was named after her brother Rhaegar. I don't know how the egg could have captured his consciousness, but her stillborn son Rhaego may be in there. Rhaegal was the dragon that bathed Quentyn Martell with fire, so if your theory is correct, Qyentyn's consciousness may be inside Rhaegal.

I don't know if it's as simple as dying around a dragon or dragon egg.  I think it might take a voluntary action to establish a telepathic link with the dragon before death.  Drogo or Rhaego or Mirri's lives may have been necessary to hatch the eggs, and their "spirits" may very well have been transferred to give life to the dragons, but that may not be the same as transferring a consciousness into the dragon.  

Otherwise (if my theory is correct) than it shouldn't matter that Aemon was old or infirmed to be the head of a dragon.  All that should matter was that in death Aemon's consciousness can be transferred.  Which makes me think that perhaps the "dragon head" needs to make a voluntary act to establish a psychic link with the dragon before death.  And if it requires a near death experience to unleash this psychic ability (like it did with Bran) then it makes sense that Aemon would think he's too old and frail.  Aemon would not be able to survive the long enough to open his third eye and establish a psychic connection with the dragon before his death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, corbon said:

The rebels clad in ice though shows that there is more to it than just the prosaic. She clearly has clearly a (sub?)consciousness of the greater battle, the reason for the three heads/prophecy etc.

I'm not sure, but wasn't it you who said that Dany had intuitive knowledge?  Dany hatches the dragon eggs without knowing what she is actually doing.  How does she come by that knowledge, especially when everyone else failed.

She has been transformed and cleansed in spiritual fire, made ready for what is to come:

Quote

A Game of Thrones - Daenerys III

Yet when she slept that night, she dreamt the dragon dream again. Viserys was not in it this time. There was only her and the dragon. Its scales were black as night, wet and slick with blood. Her blood, Dany sensed. Its eyes were pools of molten magma, and when it opened its mouth, the flame came roaring out in a hot jet. She could hear it singing to her. She opened her arms to the fire, embraced it, let it swallow her whole, let it cleanse her and temper her and scour her clean. She could feel her flesh sear and blacken and slough away, could feel her blood boil and turn to steam, and yet there was no pain. She felt strong and new and fierce.

I don't think Dany's dreams are ordinary dreams.  GRRM has said that Dany had (or was given) temporary immunity from fire, perhaps her knowledge comes from the same source.

1 hour ago, corbon said:

Or is it 'outside' understanding from a mystical source? I know which idea will be popular here. :P

LOL!

Edited by LynnS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, corbon said:

The question for me, is does this indicate that Dany has a deeper understanding of the three heads/prophecy/line of Aerys and Rhaella etc than we've been led to believe? I for one thought she had only a relatively superficial '3 heads' idea based more on Aegon the Conqueror and the Targaryen symbols and phrase than, for example, the sort of knowledge that Aemon and Rhaegar had.

I don't really know the significance or meaning of the words the dragon has three heads.  More to the point, neither does Dany.

We've been entertaining the idea that Starks have their own Musgrave Ritual; they know the words:  there must always be a Stark in Winterfell and Winter is coming; and they go through the motions, without understanding the significance.  I think something similar has happened with the Targs.  The Dragon has Three Heads might be their own Musgrave Ritual.

The second connection I would make is about direwolves and dragons.  We know something about warging and skinchanging, and also, that the wolves initiate the wolf dreams, with the Stark kids, in the beginning.  Is that also true of dragon riders and their bonded riders?  Is the dragon initiating the connection with Dany in her dreams?

If Starks can have a second life in their wolves; can Targs have a second life in their dragons?  If dead Starks are captured in stone in the crypts of Winterfell; can the souls of Targs be captured in stone dragon eggs?  Then reborn in the ritual that Dany performs with Drogo's funeral?

If Dany's source is an old source; one that has knowledge of the ritual; then does it follow that her dream of riding Rhaegar to the battle of Trident is an old memory; the way it should have been?
 

Quote

A Game of Thrones - Daenerys VIII

"I will stay," Dany said. "The man took me under the stars and gave life to the child inside me. I will not leave him."

"You must. Once I begin to sing, no one must enter this tent. My song will wake powers old and dark. The dead will dance here this night. No living man must look on them."

These are the questions that occupy me. 

 

Edited by LynnS

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

×