Jump to content

(f)dany


CamiloRP

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Lilac & Gooseberries said:

An ancient house having a bastarrd as its Lady and somehow no one in the books have mentioned it? Not even Tytos? As I said fan fiction.

I never said that Mya Rivers married with THE Lord Blackwood. She married with a Blackwood, not Lord Blackwood, just a member of a Blackwood House. So she was not a Lady of their House, not a wife of their Lord, she was just a member of their House, and thus not worthy of mentioning more than a hundren years later in a casual conversation between her distant relative (like Tytos) and some random person. So why people from House Blackwood would mention it now, that in the past one of their family's members married with a half-Blackwood half-bastard-Targaryen girl, who was Aegon the Unworthy's daughter? What would be the point of them mentioning it?

GRRM will eventually reveal this information in later books. Either Bloodraven will tell Bran that his niece, Melantha, married with a Stark and thus was Bran's great great grandmother. Or GRRM will fill in gaps in the Starks' family tree in the second volume of Fire&Blood. Or it will be mentioned later in the books, in the moment of the plot when this revelation will be relevant.

1 hour ago, Lilac & Gooseberries said:

Your crackpot, to the point of fan fiction, is not a proof. You have made a crackpot based on crackpots and you want the others to accept your crackpots as truth and act on it. That is not how it works.

It's not a crackpot, and it is based not on a crackpot, but on facts written by GRRM in his books. I noticed those elements and interpreted them. Just because you are unable to figure out what I did, doesn't mean that it's a crackpot, it only means that I'm smarter than an average reader of ASOIAF.

Will it be a sufficient enough proof for you, when what I wrote will be confirmed by GRRM in later books? I'll list my claims for further reference:

1. Cregan Stark is Melissa Blackwood's grandfather.

2. Melantha Blackwood is Mya Rivers' daughter.

3. The Bastard of Harrenhal is ancestor of Catelyn Tully and Petyr Baelish, and thru that guy Cat and Petyr and their children are descendants of Aegon IV Targaryen.

4. Johanna Swann is Larra Rogare's mother.

5. Larra Rogare and Serenei of Lys is the same person. She was a cat-skinchanger and a shadowbinder.

6. Shiera Seastar, shadowbinder Quaithe, and the Three-Eyed Crow is the same person.

7. Shiera is a cat-skinchanger, she met Mance Rayder prior he deserted from the Night's Watch, and she was the one who orchestrated his desertion.

8. Princess Rhaenys also was a cat-skinchanger. The black cat that lives at the Red Keep is the carrier of her soul.

Let's revisit this thread and check this list after ADOS's and F&B-V2's release. Then we'll continue our discussion. Because now you're not discussing, now you're just parroting - crackpot, crackpot, crackpot. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Megorova said:

Let's revisit this thread and check this list after ADOS's and F&B-V2's release. Then we'll continue our discussion. Because now you're not discussing, now you're just parroting - crackpot, crackpot, crackpot. :rolleyes:

When something looks like a crackpot, sounds like an crackpot and has no context clues like a crackpot is a crackpot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Megorova you and I had discussions similar to the one you are having with @Lilac & Gooseberries and I'm willing to bet you had similar discussions with a lot more people too. If you want to believe something based on very little evidence, personal interpretations and such, it's fine, believe it. But don't take it as a certainty, because you are likely to be disappointed when it turns out not to be what you expect. And don't say you are the only one realizing all this things because you are 'smarter than everyone else' because it makes you sound incredibly rude and narrow-minded and you will feel very dumb when it turns out you were wrong. I have many personal theories that I subscribe to, some are more crackpot than others, some are widely accepted, some go specifically against theories that are widely accepted and all, I think, have more evidence for them than anything I've seen you argue. But even then, I know I'm wrong about some of them, maybe most of them, or maybe even all of them. Maybe it's the agnostic in me, but even the theories I'm 99,999999% sure about I would not act as if they were a certainty, because they are not. 

Look at it from the outside. Don't you think it highly unlikely that only one fan out of millions has discovered 'the truth' and that those other million fans, when confronted with the truth, think it nonsense?

 

In here you will find me arguing against a person who thinks Jaqen H'gar is Aegon VI but not Young Griff. Your arguments often make me think of this post. You sound alike.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, CamiloRP said:

@Megorova you and I had discussions similar to the one you are having with @Lilac & Gooseberries and I'm willing to bet you had similar discussions with a lot more people too.

That's because I keep hoping that somewhere on this forum I will find someone who is able to think out of the box, someone who is not narrow minded and will be willing to intellectually discuss outlandish theories, instead of just yapping tinfoil! crackpot! can't be! ridiculous!

8 hours ago, CamiloRP said:

And don't say you are the only one realizing all this things because you are 'smarter than everyone else' because it makes you sound incredibly rude and narrow-minded and you will feel very dumb when it turns out you were wrong.

Don't worry, I won't feel dumb even if majority of my theories will turn out to be incorrect. Because I at least explored new areas in ASOIAF, ideas that other readers haven't thought about. You know, it becomes boring to read 1001st theory about who is Valonqar, or who is the Younger More Beautiful Queen, etc. That's all so boooorrrriiiiiiiiing. Just because we got stuck with no new reading material, since GRRM is not ready to release TWOW, doesn't mean that we can't discuss something new, a part/aspects of ASOIAF that are not explored yet. No?

8 hours ago, CamiloRP said:

Look at it from the outside. Don't you think it highly unlikely that only one fan out of millions has discovered 'the truth' and that those other million fans, when confronted with the truth, think it nonsense?

It's not as unlikely as you think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Megorova said:

That's because I keep hoping that somewhere on this forum I will find someone who is able to think out of the box, someone who is not narrow minded and will be willing to intellectually discuss outlandish theories, instead of just yapping tinfoil! crackpot! can't be! ridiculous!

Don't worry, I won't feel dumb even if majority of my theories will turn out to be incorrect. Because I at least explored new areas in ASOIAF, ideas that other readers haven't thought about. You know, it becomes boring to read 1001st theory about who is Valonqar, or who is the Younger More Beautiful Queen, etc. That's all so boooorrrriiiiiiiiing. Just because we got stuck with no new reading material, since GRRM is not ready to release TWOW, doesn't mean that we can't discuss something new, a part/aspects of ASOIAF that are not explored yet. No?

It's not as unlikely as you think.

Well, that's different, I love talking about outlet dish ideas that have little evidence for them and probably won't happen, but I do it clarifying what they are. While when you do it you sound absolutely convinced that you are speaking The Truth and everyone else is wrong. That makes you sound really narrow-minded and it tends to drive off anyone interested in talking about it. I meant what I said above, I genuinely love talking weird probably not true theories, but I don't feel like doing it with someone who treats them as a 100% certainty and says they are smarter than everyone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/30/2021 at 12:21 PM, bluntt said:

from the looks of the few comments i skimmed it seems nobody has read this essay:
https://thelasthearth.freeforums.net/thread/572/dany

A bit thinfoilish but still if someone is into alternative theories its worth a read.
P.s(No there is no mother and son incest lol and Daenerys is still Targaryen but not the one she thinks).

Its been read by many (Last Hearth used to have quite a few interesting discussions), most of which were carried out here as well), but its value is minimal at best. The writer got banned from this forum I believe - his arguments here were generally of a similar competence level and he wasn't very accepting of critical analysis. 

I know, thats sounds harsh.
Lets briefly look at just one concept in it, the Storm at Dany's birth as an example.

Quote

First up, the lack of any mention of this storm whatsoever by anybody who lives in Westoros. Oh there’s plenty of mentions about storms hitting Dragonstone in general, but nobody other than Dany ever once mentions this storm that she was born during. Not Stannis. Not Davos. Not Florent. Not Cressen. Etc. Nobody on Dragonstone ever mentions any storm that wracked the island in 284 that Stannis then had to repair/there’s still damage showing. Nobody elsewise ever mentions any storm at all. The only mention of any storm that struck Dragonstone during Dany’s birth, is Dany herself. It’s found absolutely nowhere elsewhere in the series. There’s no record about this storm except from Dany. Which is odd because Dany claims it was the greatest storm in the memory of Westoros... yet nobody in Westoros has any memory of this storm.

Logical fallacy: Because no one other than Dany (who is the only person present we've met, with the possible exception of Cressen) ever mentions it, it therefore never happened.
People (characters) don't mention what isn't relevant to them in the scene they are in - or there would be 5000 bloated books, utterly boring and filled with irrelevances as well as a few random cross references, not the 5 books we have.

Note also that Kevan Lannister accepts her as "Danaerys Stormborn" in his own head. So its clear that the storm at her birth was an actual thing - its acknowledged and not disputed by her enemies in Westeros.
But inconvenient facts get left out of bad theories.

Quote

First off, if a storm wracked Dragonstone, why didn’t it wrack King’s Landing too? Both are on Blackwater Bay. Surely if the “greatest storm in the memory of Westoros” struck Dragonstone, it also struck King’s Landing no? Yet again, no one mentions King’s Landing having been struck by any storm at that period in time, and more importantly we know that the storm which struck Dragonstone supposedly shattered the Targaryen fleet, yet Stannis was in the process of building a new fleet for Robert to take Dragonstone

Err... A storm that hit Dragonstone must also hit Kings Landing because they are in the same "bay"?
The distance between Dragonstone and KL is about the same as the length of the wall (~300 miles).  And KL is protected by Massey's Hook, not to mention the mainland.  Dragonstone is at the mouth of the Bay more or less open to the clear ocean. Thats like saying every storm that hits, say London, must also hit Amsterdam with the same force. Or Boston/NY. Or Bahamas/Miami. Sometimes they do, sometimes they miss entirely, sometimes they hit one place hard and another with less effect.
Rank stupidity 2: A fleet being built (ie in drydocks and/or fully sheltered harbour with excess capacity) is at the same degree of risk as one anchored off the coast (Dragonstone harbour probably doesn't have the capacity for the entire mainland Royal Fleet, explaining why the ex-Royal fleet was anchored with less protection). I mean, its right there in the writer's own words!

Quote

So why wasn’t Stannis’ fleet also destroyed? If this storm was so bad that it wrecked the Targaryen fleet, it should’ve also wrecked Stannis’. Yet Stannis clearly sails to Dragonstone, and he mentions zero storms troubling him. In fact he never once even mentions that any storm struck Dragonstone then, or that one shattered the Targaryen fleet, let alone that there ever was a Targaryen fleet.

Stannis had to rebuild the Royal fleet because the old one was... where? 
He didn't sail to Dragonstone and take it until 9 months after the sack because? 
Why didn't he just transport troops straight to Dragonstone after the Sack? Was all shipping destroyed in the Sack? How come that was never mentioned?

The Royal Fleet, which sailed away from the Rebels to the last Targaryen holdout Dragonstone, was the entire reason Stannis had spend 8 or 9 months or so to build a new fleet!
And he never had to fight it because it was destroyed by the storm before he was ready to take it on, at least as an effective force.
Stannis wasn't troubled by the Storm because he sailed there after it. 

This entire paragraph quoted, like nearly all of the theory, is just... :blink: ...there are no words. 

Quote

Also, if a storm destroyed the Targaryen boats, then how did Darry sail away?

Apparently a military fleet that is not in the local harbour being effectively destroyed means not only that every single ship in the fleet was sunk but also that every single vessel of the local merchant and fishing fleets, that were in their normal berths in the harbor, were also sunk! And no ship came to visit in the next week or two before Stannis arrived with his newly finished fleet.

 

You can do this to almost everything written in the theory. Its staggeringly awful argument, even though there are a few interesting but inconclusive points behind it.
Any license needed to make a point is taken, any restriction that might, under some circumstances, counter other theories is hard-lined as fact with no variance given, any vague idea is twisted hard, always in the same direction.

The arguments made are not credible, even if some of the points have some basis in validity.

Hence, it might appear that people haven't read it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Lord Browndodd said:

Surely the Stark kids' warging ability stems from their psychic bond with their direwolves, which rids us of any need to consider a genetic component?  (Presumably Sansa doesn't become a warg owing to Lady's early death)

That kind of puts the cart before the horse doesn't it?  Why were they initially able to establish a psychic link with their direwolves?  If you read Varamyr's chapter wargs seem to naturally pick up a psychic bond with animals they are close to, and the easiest animals to bond with are dogs.  Varamyr first instinctually bonded with his pet dogs even before he received any training.  There is nothing to suggest that his dogs were the cause of his warg abilities.  They were just the natural recipients of the psychic connection.  After he received additional training he was able to reach out and control animals that were usually fairly resistant to a warg's influence.  

As far as the Stark kids are concerned, we only know that two for certain are wargs, Bran and Arya.  We have a very strong reason to believe that Robb may be as well, although it's hard to confirm it, since we don't have access to his POV.  We don't really know that Rickon is.  As for Sansa, it could very well be that she has a latent warg ability, but she wasn't around Lady long enough to develop it.  Or perhaps she has subconsciously supressed it.

I don't think the direwolves triggered it.  I think the direwolves became susceptible to the psychic connection because they were basically raised by the individual children.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Frey family reunion said:

As far as the Stark kids are concerned, we only know that two for certain are wargs, Bran and Arya.  We have a very strong reason to believe that Robb may be as well, although it's hard to confirm it, since we don't have access to his POV.  We don't really know that Rickon is.  As for Sansa, it could very well be that she has a latent warg ability, but she wasn't around Lady long enough to develop it.  Or perhaps she has subconsciously supressed it.

Jon is a warg as well, perhaps not as powerful as Bran and Arya are at this point in time, but it doesn't change what he is. He was inside Ghost when Orell's eagle attacked the direwolf. And there are all the other times he bumps into Ghost's consciousness accidentally. There's the wolf dream he has in the opening pages of ADwD. He is acknowledged as a warg by both Varamyr and Borroq.

There's good indication that Rickon spends too much time inside his doggo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/31/2021 at 4:10 PM, LynnS said:

Well, I'm going to weigh in with some tinfoil because covid lockdowns are making me crazy enough to say some stuff without any need to justify myself at all.   I'm OK with Dany being Rhaegar's third child by Ashera Dayne.  Given that Dany is the second coming of Ashera according to Selmy.  I think it was Ashera that Rhaegar fell in love with at Harrenhall rather than Lyanna.  I think it likely that Rhagar was addressing Ashera in Dany's vision on HoU when he said there must be one more.

As one of Elia's handmaidens and probably good friend, I can see Ashera present at  Aegon's birth.  I doubt Elia would object to Ashera since they share the same cultural mores concerning sexuality and probably Rhaegar's vision of the PWIP .   I think it a possible that Dany was born on Dragonstone within  nine months or so after Aegon's birth. 

That means that Rhaegar's mother died while giving birth along with her infant girl and Dany is a convenient substitute fitting someone's political machinations..  Dany is born of salt and smoke on Dragonstone and of the appropriate bloodline to satisfy the prophecy or at least to play some part in said prophesy.

It seems likely to me that Dany and Viserys were split up and "hidden" in different locations after their flight from Dragonstone with Viserys in Braavos and Dany in Lys where she would be hidden in plain sight.  Her Valyrion looks would not stand out in the population.  Lemon trees would easily grow in this climate and be used in the making of essential oils for perfumes.  Dany not only has visual memories of the lemon tree but olfactory memories of home.

So there it is. My covid tinfoil for the day.

For me in the books, Dany is really Rhaegar's third child with Ashara. Lyanna is probably Jon's mother with Arthur or Mance or Brandon (yep, stark incest). Now, if Rhaella's child survived I think that child is Young Griff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Khal Rhaego Targaryen said:

For me in the books, Dany is really Rhaegar's third child with Ashara. Lyanna is probably Jon's mother with Arthur or Mance or Brandon (yep, stark incest). Now, if Rhaella's child survived I think that child is Young Griff.

Pregnancy doesn't last for two years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Khal Rhaego Targaryen said:

For me in the books, Dany is really Rhaegar's third child with Ashara. Lyanna is probably Jon's mother with Arthur or Mance or Brandon (yep, stark incest). Now, if Rhaella's child survived I think that child is Young Griff.

Absolutely nothing in the books points to Lyanna having a sexual relationship with Arthur, Mance (who there's no indication she ever met), or Brandon, or any of them being Jon's father. And how would the timeline logistics even work if Mance or Brandon were the father? If it was Arthur or Mance, why would Ned claim Jon as his bastard? What would be the point of GRRM making any of these guys Jon's father?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, lehutin said:

Expectations. /Subverted.

Quote

They say: “Oh God, the butler did it!”, to use an example of a mystery novel. Then, you think: “I have to change the ending! The maiden would be the criminal!” To my mind that way is a disaster because if you are doing well you work, the books are full of clues that point to the butler doing it and help you to figure up the butler did it, but if you change the ending to point the maiden, the clues make no sense anymore; they are wrong or are lies, and I am not a liar.-GRRM

The clues are there for a reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Lilac & Gooseberries said:

The clues are there for a reason.

And yet you and other posters here ignore clues to which I pointed in the books, clues that indicate that Jon and Stark-children are skinchangers because they are descendants from two lines of Aegon IV (whose mother and grandmother also were skinchangers), and if Dany also was a descendant of two such lines, a child of Rhaella and Rhaegar, then Dany also would have been a skinchanger, but she isn't, thus she is not Rhaegar's daughter, not (f)Dany, which is the topic of this thread. 

GRRM did planted a lot of clues about what he is going to write in further books. Though readers, such as you, tend to ignore those clues. So from you "the clues are there for a reason" sounds silly, because you yourself completely ignore this principle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Megorova said:

And yet you and other posters here ignore clues to which I pointed in the books, clues that indicate that Jon and Stark-children are skinchangers because they are descendants from two lines of Aegon IV (whose mother and grandmother also were skinchangers), and if Dany also was a descendant of two such lines, a child of Rhaella and Rhaegar, then Dany also would have been a skinchanger, but she isn't, thus she is not Rhaegar's daughter, not (f)Dany, which is the topic of this thread. 

GRRM did planted a lot of clues about what he is going to write in further books. Though readers, such as you, tend to ignore those clues. So from you "the clues are there for a reason" sounds silly, because you yourself completely ignore this principle.

We cannot see clues where there is none. What you produce are families and lineages out of nowhere. And in the particular crackpot you are talking about there is no proof that one of Aegon’s bastards married in the ancient Blackwood family and even worse that the Warden of the North would had married with a bastard’s child. Nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...