Heresy 228 and one over the eight

[corbon]

3 hours ago, JNR said:

Well, you can think what pleases you best.  But she will still remain a weak candidate, because she would have been an eighth-grader who had zero training or experience jousting in tournaments.

Which GRRM has given us evidence for elsewhere in the books. 
We have 10 yr old Barristan the Bold entering a tournament. Not perfrorming well, but able to perform. We have Lady Lance in tWoW.
A 13-14 yr old girl, strongwilled and tomboyish, an astonishingly good rider, who likes to play at swordfightng, is gping to be considerably more capable of holding a light lance well than a 10 year old boy.

Yes, I think its a little over the top from GRRM. But its not early as over the top as the three no-names all being amongst the 5 champions at the end of the day. And GRRM has laid the groundwork for it. Its his world, not yours.

3 hours ago, JNR said:

She can't be shown in canon as picking up a lance in her life -- you have to wander over to the kooky app for that idea (and the app is, we know, full of BS).  She is certainly never said to have been trained by anyone, even for one day. 

Whoop de do. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Thats a logical fallacy. It shows a relative weakness in the argument for, mitigated in this case by other data, but is not in itself a point against the argument.
What she can be shown in canon is a desire to play at fighting with swords, and a boldness and aggressiveness to scatter three squires beating up on her father's bannerman. And other relevant points.

3 hours ago, JNR said:

And if she was the mystery knight, she was wearing bits and pieces of armor that were never made for her.  Can we show that she ever rode a horse, once, while wearing any sort of armor -- even outside a joust, alone? No, we can't.

AE is not EA.
What can be shown is cannon is that she was a superb horsewoman. Which is 75% of the skillset of jousting in GRRMS world.

3 hours ago, JNR said:

Frankly, I don't think an eighth-grade Barristan Selmy or Arthur Dayne or the Mountain would stand a chance in hell under those conditions. 

GRRM disagrees with you. 
She only needs to beat 3 undistingushed, unnamed knights. 

And she's given the tools in GRRMs world.
An in world expert (Jaime) tells us that jousting is 75% horsemanship.
We see the slender 16 year old Loras defeat the Mountain due to horsemanship. Frankly un-filled-out teen Loras vs the mountain is much less of a parity matchup than Lyanna vs a 'normal' man.

3 hours ago, JNR said:

I'd expect them all to get brutalized, just as Barristan did when he rode as a mystery knight against Duncan Targaryen.  Lyanna would have stood no chance either.

GRRM disagrees with you.
Barristan was beaten, but no indication he was 'brutalised'. And there is a big difference between a 10 year old and a 13-14 year old.

3 hours ago, JNR said:

Even Lyanna's height is a doubtful matter. Can we show she was short enough to have been the knight? No, we can't -- we have to imagine she was short, which fans constantly do for no apparent reason.  (What if she looked like Sophie Turner?)

And this just shows how pathetic your case is. 
We have to "imagine" a 13-14 year old girl is considered 'short' compared to fully grown men?

3 hours ago, JNR said:

How about that peculiar booming voice? Do we know Lyanna had such a voice?  No... I don't think we do.

Just as pathetic.
Closed helmet. Unraised visor. girl deliberately deepening her voice to try to keep disguised.

Supporting evidence (as if it was really need to such an obviously countered point!)? Brienne. Catelyn thought she was a man when she first saw her fighting. Even after she spoke, from within her helm, Catelyn still didn't realise she was a woman, Ser Colen had to tell her.

3 hours ago, JNR said:

Now, I could attack any other candidate just as easily.  There are really no good candidates, not based on available info.  But as I said, that doesn't strengthen the case for Lyanna, who remains one more implausible possibility among many.

It has to be someone and the field of possibilities is small. Lyanna is one of the very few candidates and your objections aren't worthy of the name, and countered by GRRM in every case.

[Melifeather]

8 minutes ago, corbon said:

We see the slender 16 year old Loras defeat the Mountain due to horsemanship. Frankly un-filled-out teen Loras vs the mountain is much less of a parity matchup than Lyanna vs a 'normal' man.

Loras won because he rode a mare in heat, which caused Gregor's stallion to be difficult to control.

 

[corbon]

45 minutes ago, Melifeather said:

Ned's vows encompass both his vows to Catelyn, but also his vows to Hoster and their alliance. Marriage was much more than finding a partner to have children with. It binded Tully and Stark together sort of like sealing a contract. Ned needed Hoster's men to help save Robert. He made a vow and kept his promises.

Ned made lots of vows. But he isn;t think of his general vows, he's explicitly think of those he made to Lyanna as she lay dying.

Quote

If it turns out that Ned is Jon's father, then accepting responsibility for his bastard son really emphasizes the comparison Ned is making between himself and Robert. In Ned's train of thought, Robert was right there in there. The main topic was about men caring for their bastards. Robert didn't accept responsibility, but Ned did.

The main topic is Ned caring for bastards. And not his ones either.
Ned compares first his behaviour to Roberts as a sad generality. Robert makes promises easy, and doesn't keep them. Ned makes them hard, and keeps them, or tries hard to (we know he sometimes fails because he thinks of his broken promises at other times).

Thats the general. Ned then narrows that to the specific, explicitly. The promises, which are vows, he made to Lyanna as she lay dying.

Ned isn't having a deep thought session about him and Robert here. This is all about Barra, and the plea from her mum. Ned knows he's going to make a promise, and try to keep it. The contrast between him and Robert, relevant because this is a promise he''s really making on behalf of Robert because his friend is an asshole, comes naturally, but its an aside, not a focus. The focus is Barra's fate, and Ned's part in it. The thought train to Lyanna is the same as the Robert one. Its a natural comparison, but its an aside, not the focus. Ned's protection of Barra is the focus, and its saddening to him on two fronts - the "sigh, Robert is an asshole but I'm his friend, I've got his back" front and the 'this is just like Lyanna again" front. 

Quote

I'm not saying that Ned doesn't also say that he made promises to Lyanna, because it's evident that he did. What I am saying is this is a tricky bit of writing designed to lead you towards a conclusion the author wants you to make, but I just don't believe it's true. 

I'm saying its a very simple and clear piece of writing that you have to invent trickiness that isn't there, and avoid and minimise the explicit text, so that you can try to trick everyone else that your theories could possibly make sense.

Quote

I don't know what RTFT means.

 

Read The Frikken Text. An adaptation of RTFM.

[corbon]

2 minutes ago, Melifeather said:

Loras won because he rode a mare in heat, which caused Gregor's stallion to be difficult to control.

 

In other words, he knew horses and rode well, whereas Gregor lost because he couldn't handle his horse.

The massive disparity is size and strength counted for nothing.

[corbon]

Sheesh, is everyone else enjoying the show? Might be time for me to shut up a bit!

[redriver]

22 minutes ago, Melifeather said:

Loras won because he rode a mare in heat, which caused Gregor's stallion to be difficult to control.

 

Which shows equine cleverness and ability can win the day.We know Lyanna has that.

Ha corbon ninja'd me!

[redriver]

6 minutes ago, corbon said:

Sheesh, is everyone else enjoying the show? Might be time for me to shut up a bit!

I am.

And please don't shut up.Your rationality is a relief in a sea of denial and delusion.

[Melifeather]

1 hour ago, corbon said:

Ned made lots of vows. But he isn;t think of his general vows, he's explicitly think of those he made to Lyanna as she lay dying.

The main topic is Ned caring for bastards. And not his ones either.
Ned compares first his behaviour to Roberts as a sad generality. Robert makes promises easy, and doesn't keep them. Ned makes them hard, and keeps them, or tries hard to (we know he sometimes fails because he thinks of his broken promises at other times).

Thats the general. Ned then narrows that to the specific, explicitly. The promises, which are vows, he made to Lyanna as she lay dying.

Ned isn't having a deep thought session about him and Robert here. This is all about Barra, and the plea from her mum. Ned knows he's going to make a promise, and try to keep it. The contrast between him and Robert, relevant because this is a promise he''s really making on behalf of Robert because his friend is an asshole, comes naturally, but its an aside, not a focus. The focus is Barra's fate, and Ned's part in it. The thought train to Lyanna is the same as the Robert one. Its a natural comparison, but its an aside, not the focus. Ned's protection of Barra is the focus, and its saddening to him on two fronts - the "sigh, Robert is an asshole but I'm his friend, I've got his back" front and the 'this is just like Lyanna again" front. 

I'm saying its a very simple and clear piece of writing that you have to invent trickiness that isn't there, and avoid and minimise the explicit text, so that you can try to trick everyone else that your theories could possibly make sense.

Read The Frikken Text. An adaptation of RTFM.

LIke I said, interpretation is context and context is based upon who the reader believes Jon's parents are. Only time will tell.

You really should be more respectful towards other people and their ideas, because if R+L=J proves false, you're going to look like a real sarcastic asshole.

[corbon]

13 minutes ago, Melifeather said:

LIke I said, interpretation is context and context is based upon who the reader believes Jon's parents are. Only time will tell.

Well, its clear that your theories inform your interpretation. For me I believe its the other way around. The text is read according to what is clearly writte on the page. That then gets applied to theories, to find if it supports, is agnostic, or counters, various theories - which then get adapted if necessary.

I don't believe that R+L=J has anything to do with reading that Barra's mom is making a plea to Ned.
I don't believe that R+L=J has anything to do with reading that Ned's thinking of Robert and Lyanna are asides to the main context which is Ned to care, or not, for Barra.
I don't believe that R+L=J has anything to do with reading that Ned's promise to Barra's mum leads him to think of his promises to Lyanna on her death bed.

I do agree with you that your absolute desire that R+L NOT= J leads you to the twisted interpretations of a clear, clean piece of writing.
 

[Lady Dyanna]

17 hours ago, corbon said:

That was specifically Lady, not Lyanna. Lady was actually going to get a butcher. Lyanna got a fever, from a bloody bed. I don;t think its a fair representation to extend that comment in the circumstances.

There are however two separate occurrences (the fight with the Butcher’s Boy, and Jon defending Sam, aka Sir Piggy, when he arrives at Castle Black) that I feel are possibly linked to Lyanna defending Howland at the ToHH. There’s a similar feel to them and color/animal symbolism is heavily applied. But, it’s difficult to line up exactly who is who, as the characters themselves involved in these occurrences almost seem to shift roles based upon their personal choices. 

[Lady Dyanna]

19 hours ago, corbon said:

That I could accept, but the standard given (not mine) was that the dream can't be changed if its a green dream.

Well who made up that nonsense? Nothing is ever permanent. The only constant in life is change. No? 

[corbon]

34 minutes ago, Lady Dyanna said:

Well who made up that nonsense? Nothing is ever permanent. The only constant in life is change. No? 

Well, @LynnS was throwing out the idea tha Ned's dream had flavour similar to Jojen's green dream and running with it. I challenged her on that premise. She backed herself up with a quote I'd not found (though I don't think that quote shows 'similar flavour') and explained further: 

On 11/23/2019 at 5:44 AM, LynnS said:

I'll just refer to this search for other quotes.  The main features are that green dreams are hard to interpret, they are true dreams sent by the gods as a warning and they can't be changed. 

I joking changed the first part to say that green  all dreams are hard to interpret (I don't think its a fair call to pin that as a defining factor of green dreams in particular as opposed to dreams in general), but the 'true dreams sent by the gods' part and 'can't be changed' part are her definition as pertains to the idea that Ned's dream shows green-dream-like qualities, or rather, flavour.

All I'm wondering, still, is how Ned's dream shows a flavour of green dreams?

I'm not arguing Ned's dream never changed - in fact I'm arguing it did, so where's the green dream flavour?
Its a cool idea, that Ned's dream might be a green dream, but what is there to actually back it up? So far, nothing demonstrated AFAICT.

 

[Lady Dyanna]

1 hour ago, corbon said:

'm not arguing Ned's dream never changed - in fact I'm arguing it did, so where's the green dream flavour?
Its a cool idea, that Ned's dream might be a green dream, but what is there to actually back it up? So far, nothing demonstrated AFAICT.

AFAIR there really is no information available to support the idea that the dream is a green dream. There’s no direct evidence of any weirwood involvement. And no further repetition. 

[Lady Dyanna]

I mean let’s look at Jojen. He is our one clear example of a green-dreamer. AFAICT there’s no real similarity btwn his experience and Ned’s. 

[Lord Aegon The Compromiser]

17 hours ago, Black Crow said:

Historically-speaking, when the British Army experimented with introducing lances for some of its light cavalry regiments after Waterloo, an unexpected bonus turned out to be the rediscovery that training a man in carrying a lance had the uncovenanted effect of markedly improving his general riding skills - so much so that lances were adopted by all cavalry regiments as a training aid, whatever their intended role in battle.

The point of this being that its testified on all sides, and not just  the App that Lyanna was a superb rider. In "mediaeval" times, the lance was absolutely integral to horsemanship.

Armour, not so integral, but sticking a tin bucket over ones head does produce a booming effect 

Where in canon (not a mod's pinky promise) does it say that Lyanna was a superb horse rider?

[Lord Aegon The Compromiser]

16 hours ago, JNR said:

How intriguing.  You seem to imply that because he "said yea or nay," that means the information is somehow factual and beyond dispute.

In that case, here are some more facts drawn from the app that are beyond dispute:

• Jon is the son of Ned Stark. Thus, he cannot possibly be the son of Rhaegar Targaryen.

• Aegon Targaryen, son of Rhaegar Targaryen, died at King's Landing... and he also appears in A Dance with Dragons as a character.  This is a flat contradiction, as you should be well aware, and it means the app is certainly full of BS on at least one of those points, and possibly both.

• Melisandre is from Asshai originally. She cannot possibly be from anywhere else.

Now, really Ran.  You yourself have told us you don't believe the first one or the last one. 

You've argued against Mel's origin being Asshai based on the same logic I would use -- that we know from Melisandre's own thoughts that she really can't be from Asshai.

But there it is, in the app all the same.  Just like all the other BS.  Why? 

Well, maybe it's because the app is not full of facts. It's full of ideas believed by people in Westeros, which are frequently BS.  And that's exactly why the app flatly states Jon Snow is the son of Ned Stark, just like every one of the book appendices do.

So... is it possible that people believe Lyanna tilted at rings?  Sure -- why not? But that wouldn't make it a fact, any more than Jon's father being Ned is a fact.

Wow. So I was being too nice saying it was a "mod's pinky promise" that the app information was correct. The truth is far worse. In reality the mod was indisputably dishonest in the way they presented the information. 

Considering the mod is the forum owner, I wonder how such an approach has effected the development of theories around here over the years. It seems to me that members that don't notice the dishonesty could develop an awful lot of false confidence in certain theories. 

[Lord Aegon The Compromiser]

16 hours ago, corbon said:

Exactly.

No, check back. 
My position is that Ned was thinking of the promises he made Lyanna as a direct result of the promises he made to Barra's mum. 
Melifeather says thats nonsense, and I'm biased because I think R+L=J. She says Ned was thinking about his marriage vows. I pointed out that I think that Ned was thinking of his promises to the dying Lyanna not because R+L=J, but because Ned explicitly told us that it was the promises he made to the dying Lyanna that his mind turned to in that situation.

I do agree that the way Ned's promises to Barra's mum make him think of the promises he made to Lyanna as she lay dying is one of the many supporting pieces of evidence for R+L=J. I also think thats why certain people have to literally deny the explicit text, even to the point of cutting it out of every quote they make discussing that exact subject, is because they are utterly committed to "NOT R+L=J under any circumstances" and therefore refuse to accept evidence that supports it. 

RTFT.
Its not who Ned is comparing himself to. Its where the plea and his promise takes him. To the promises he made Lyanna as she lay dying.

 

My apologies for misreading your previous comment. 

But...how is Ned's interaction with Barra's mom a piece of supporting evidence for RLJ? He never mentions what his promises to Lyanna were. He never mentions Rhaegar or Jon. 

There isn't anything about this text that explicitly connects it to the RLJ theory. Which itself is never even suggested anywhere in canon. Not a single person ever thinks to themselves "Hmmmm, I wonder if Rhaegar and Lyanna are Jon's true parents." 

You're lying to yourself when you say that people are denying that this interaction between Ned and Barra's mom is explicit textual support for RLJ. It flat out isn't...and lying to yourself is an awful way to build a theory. 

[LynnS]

11 hours ago, corbon said:

Well, @LynnS was throwing out the idea tha Ned's dream had flavour similar to Jojen's green dream and running with it. I challenged her on that premise. She backed herself up with a quote I'd not found (though I don't think that quote shows 'similar flavour') and explained further: 

 

9 hours ago, Lady Dyanna said:

I mean let’s look at Jojen. He is our one clear example of a green-dreamer. AFAICT there’s no real similarity btwn his experience and Ned’s. 

Oh for fuck sake.  Do you really think that Jojen is the only character in this story who can have a green dream?  Jojen gives us the example of what a fucking green dream looks like.  Do you really think the Ned's old dream doesn't have the same characteristics as Jojen's dream?  Just because Ned doesn't know what a fucking green dream is doesn't mean he didn't have one.

 

[redriver]

2 hours ago, Lord Aegon The Compromiser said:

Where in canon (not a mod's pinky promise) does it say that Lyanna was a superb horse rider?

Lady Dustin tells Theon Brandon and Lyanna were a pair of centaurs when they are in the crypts (I think).

[Melifeather]

2 hours ago, Lord Aegon The Compromiser said:

Where in canon (not a mod's pinky promise) does it say that Lyanna was a superb horse rider?

There's Lady Barbrey's comment that Lyanna and Brandon were so good on horseback that she called them centaurs. As for the tilting at rings, I'm not sure where in the books this is mentioned. Only the app as far as I know.

26 minutes ago, LynnS said:

 

Oh for fuck sake.  Do you really think that Jojen is the only character in this story who can have a green dream?  Jojen gives us the example of what a fucking green dream looks like.  Do you really think the Ned's old dream doesn't have the same characteristics as Jojen's dream?  Just because Ned doesn't know what a fucking green dream is doesn't mean he didn't have one.

 

I get frustrated too, but don't sink to their level. Some people get uncomfortable discussing symbolism. They want the interpretation to be clear and straightforward, but that is only skimming the surface in this series. This thread was begun under the topic of discussing symbolism and dreams, but some are refusing to examine all of the possibilities if it doesn't fit the R+L=J narrative.

The imagery in Ned's dream is like a green dream. Just like the imagery in Jojen's green dream about the sea flowing over the walls of Winterfell, the imagery of "A storm of rose petals blew across a blood-streaked sky, as blue as the eyes of death." is an allegory - a symbolic representation or visual expression that uses symbolism to convey truths or generalizations about human conduct or experience.