I am not convinced by Lemongate

[Gilbert Green]

On 4/7/2023 at 6:52 PM, three-eyed monkey said:

I'm not saying we create ourselves, and I'm not saying every event in our lives is within our control, because that's clearly not true.

Great.  So why not accept that the coin-flip quote is about what it says?  On its face, it is about the gifts/curses we receive at birth.  It does not deny that we make some choices too.  So why take issue?  Why twist it to mean something else?  You now say you don't disagree.

On 4/7/2023 at 6:52 PM, three-eyed monkey said:

I'm talking about the things the characters can control and the choices the characters must make, particularly at their major plot-points, which are decisions the characters will make that determine the direction of the plot. These choices will determine who the characters are in the end, whether they are heroes or villains in simple terms.

Yes, Christians (but not Atheists) traditionally believe that people have a limited power of free will to choose between good and evil.  Yes, it is traditional in much of Western literature (even when penned by atheists) that, for major characters at least, in the end good is rewarded and evil is punished.  That reward might even include a sort of "greatness".

But these heroes don't tend to choose "greatness."  Characters who pursue greatness tend to be villains.  And it is not without reason that Lord Acton said that "... great men are almost always bad men."

An example from THE LORD OF THE RINGS is that of Frodo.  He is not "great" and he never chooses "greatness", except when at the climax he does the WRONG thing.   Even his power to choose between good and evil are limited by factors beyond his control, at the climax, his free will is overwhelmed by evil forces.  His quest succeeds in the end because Smeagol bites off Frodo's finger and falls into the lava.   Did his choice determine this?  To an extent.  His choices got him to the point where that could happen, and also derives, in a way he could not have anticipated, from his simple acts of mercy towards Smeagol. 

Except in the above very limited sense, characters don't determine "who they are".  That's some Disney-song religion you are singing there.  Feel free to argue that traditional religions are absurd and delusional.  But the Disney-song religion is even more absurd. 

On 4/7/2023 at 6:52 PM, three-eyed monkey said:

This point is made by Jaime and the White Book.

Every character's future is a blank page, one they fill with what they choose because they are the ones writing their own stories, so to speak.

Nobody writes his own story.  That's just more Disney-song religion.  And to the limited sense Jaime does make choices, they tend to be bad ones.

Jaime's future is a blank slate only in the sense that he does not know his future.  Nor do we.  His choices do not determine the future, except in a very limited way.

Jaime is a narcissist staring in the mirror and pondering his own greatness.  He is using the White Book as a mirror because he has grown dissatisfied with Cersei, who has been his mirror up until now.

On 4/7/2023 at 6:52 PM, three-eyed monkey said:

Jaime's has a similar choice laid out before him in his arc as Dany does, because the author constructed it that way.

Says you.  You just said his future was a blank slate, and now you think you have figured it all out.

On 4/7/2023 at 6:52 PM, three-eyed monkey said:

Jaime can be the Smiling Knight or Ser Arthur Dayne.

Nonsense.  Only the Smiling Knight can be the Smiling Knight, and that primarily for reasons beyond his control.  Only Arthur Dayne can be Arthur Dayne, and that primarily for reasons beyond his control.  Stop singing Disney songs.

On 4/7/2023 at 6:52 PM, three-eyed monkey said:

This is the thematic equivalent of madness or greatness. That's why the Smiling Knight is referred to as a madman, and as we know Arthur Dayne was a great knight.

If Arthur's choices had anything to do with being a great knight, they probably had to do with his choosing humility, duty, and self-abasement.  I doubt they had anything to do with "choosing greatness". 

But we don't know much about him.  We know a little more about Egg.  Egg did not choose greatness.  But in the end, due to a twist of fate caused by factors beyond his control, he had kingship (a sort of greatness) thrust upon him.

And that's what I more-or-less expect from some of the final revelations in this novel -- a "meek shall inherit" twist.  Or, to put it another way, the man (or girl) who pursues greatness is generally the least fit to rule.

On 4/7/2023 at 6:52 PM, three-eyed monkey said:

He wanted to be Arthur Dayne, but he became the Smiling Knight. But his future is a blank page so he can try to change that and write whatever he chooses, henceforth.

He cannot write whatever he chooses.  That is Disney-song nonsense.

On 4/7/2023 at 6:52 PM, three-eyed monkey said:

I don't see any convincing argument that she is not the Mad King's daughter, nor do I see any convincing argument that she is someone else. So...

I never committed to convincing you of anything.  I merely presented 3 alternative hypotheses:  (1) Dany is the Mad Kings Daughter and also has congenital madness; (2) Dany is the Mad Kings daughter, but has no congenital madness because she got lucky when the dice were rolled at conception; or (3)  Dany is not the Mad King's daughter.

I never offered to prove that any of these alternatives were off the table.

The idea behind this thread, though, is that alternatives like #3 should be taken off the table?  Why though?  If you are going to take that stance, then perhaps the burden of disproof should be on you.

Edited April 9, 2023 by Gilbert Green

[three-eyed monkey]

5 hours ago, Gilbert Green said:

The idea behind this thread, though, is that alternatives like #3 should be taken off the table?  Why though?  If you are going to take that stance, then perhaps the burden of disproof should be on you.

Leave as many alternatives as you want on the table. I have no problem with that. I've discussed my position and why I think Dany is who we are told. You are free to disagree. If you think Dany is someone else, great, but if you want to make an argument for that belief then the burden of proof is on you. That's how it works for every theory. There is no burden of disproof on anyone.

5 hours ago, Gilbert Green said:

Feel free to argue that traditional religions are absurd and delusional. 

The reader's personal beliefs should not come into this. GRRM wrote this story, not Tolkien or anyone else, and I'm only talking about what GRRM wrote, because I'm only talking about his story; the themes, character-arcs, plot-points, etc. If you have a problem with the author's world view then feel free to take it up with him. I'm not really interested in that, I'm only interested in his story and his incredible skill as a storyteller.

[Lost Melnibonean]

On 2/28/2023 at 4:29 PM, Craving Peaches said:

Now I know memories are a tricky business as they are not always reliable. Much has been made of how Daenerys' memory of the Big House with the Red Door being in Braavos is wrong and it was actually in Dorne. I just don't feel the evidence is strong enough. As far as I am aware (correct me if I'm wrong) the theory is that because of the presence of a lemon tree in Daenerys' memories of being in Braavos, this means she was not actually in Braavos but in Dorne, because lemon trees don't grow in Braavos. I have two issues:

1. There is nothing to say Lemon trees could not grow in Braavos if imported. Trees are rare in Braavos but they are there:

And we know Daenerys was in a big house, presumably the kind of house a wealthy person would have, since it was big and they could afford servants. Furthermore, it is said that they were hosted by wealthy merchants and so on.

So if they didn't have a garden with a lemon tree in their own house, there's no reason why Daenerys couldn't have seen it in someone else's house. So I don't see why it would be impossible for her to encounter a lemon tree while staying somewhere like that in Braavos. If it wasn't in Braavos then it could have been somewhere else. Doesn't mean it was Dorne, because -

2. There is nothing that suggests lemons only grow in Dorne. Lemons are mentioned in conjunction with Dorne a lot, so we know they are grown there, but there is zero evidence that Dorne is the only place where they can grow and they can't grow anywhere else. In fact, we know they aren't exclusive to Dorne, because they are said to grow in Meereeen:

So taking they above into account I just do not see how lemon tree = actually in Dorne. Now I am not saying it is guaranteed she was in Braavos either but I don't have an issue if she was because I don't see a problem with a lemon tree being in Braavos. And for all this discussion of lemon trees we might have missed this other clue here. From Daenerys' vision in the House of the Undying:

It was never in Dorne. It was in Tyrosh. 

[Craving Peaches]

8 minutes ago, Lost Melnibonean said:

It was never in Dorne. It was in Tyrosh. 

That's currently what I'm thinking. If not in Braavos, Tyrosh is the place I see making the most sense.

[Lost Melnibonean]

1 hour ago, Craving Peaches said:

That's currently what I'm thinking. If not in Braavos, Tyrosh is the place I see making the most sense.

But then The George changed his mind, and it was Braavos. 

[Gilbert Green]

13 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Leave as many alternatives as you want on the table. I have no problem with that.

Great.

13 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

I've discussed my position and why I think Dany is who we are told. You are free to disagree.

I have explicitly left all options on the table, including the ones you prefer.  So I have not even disagreed, at least not in any strong way.

13 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

If you think Dany is someone else, great, but if you want to make an argument for that belief then the burden of proof is on you.   That's how it works for every theory.

I accept no "burden of proof".  I may be guessing, but so are you.   There is no double standard for your guesses as opposed to my guesses.

I can give reasons for certain theories, but there is no point discussing them with someone who howls "burden of proof" at me.  Such a person is telling me in advance that he is unwilling to consider any reason I give.  He will always say "that doesn't prove" or "that doesn't necessarily mean".  And he will be right.  It is only a theory.  If he wants proof, he will just have to wait for the books.

But of course he will never apply these standards to the theories he supports, and wants to discuss or speculate about.

13 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

There is no burden of disproof on anyone.

I never said you had a burden of disproof.  I only applied this to those whose ambition was to shut down discussion of theories that do not interest them.  You say that's not you, so all is good.  Right?

13 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

The reader's personal beliefs should not come into this. GRRM wrote this story, not Tolkien or anyone else, and I'm only talking about what GRRM wrote, because I'm only talking about his story; the themes, character-arcs, plot-points, etc.

I never said GRRM had to follow Tolkien.  I mentioned him because you tried to lay down some kind of universal rule of story structure, inspired by platitudes from Disney musicals.  Tolkien did not follow these rules, and GRRM does not have to either.  GRRM can do whatever he likes.  Agreed?

13 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

If you have a problem with the author's world view then feel free to take it up with him.

I never expressed any problem with the author's world view. 

Edited April 10, 2023 by Gilbert Green

[Nevets]

@Gilbert Green We are explicitly told that Daenerys Targaryen, presently in east Essos, is the daughter of Rhaella Targaryen, born on Dragonstone during a storm.  It is not a theory, it is established fact.  

If you wish to dispute this, and claim that she is someone else, it is up to you to provide competent evidence to that effect. That is what burden of proof means.  It doesn't require actual proof, which is impossible, but it does require giving good reasons to believe it.  So far I have seen nothing except wild speculation that is without textual support or even contradicts actual text.

The only thing I have seen remotely supporting this contention is the suggestion that the house with the red door was not in Braavos.  While there is a good possibility that it is outside Braavos, all that does is establish a presence elsewhere.  There are many possibilities for where and why, some of which have been mentioned on this thread.  While her being a fake is one of the possibilities mentioned, I've seen no reason to believe it and have every reason not to.

[Gilbert Green]

34 minutes ago, Nevets said:

@Gilbert Green We are explicitly told that Daenerys Targaryen, presently in east Essos, is the daughter of Rhaella Targaryen, born on Dragonstone during a storm.  It is not a theory, it is established fact.  

Ditto for Jon being Ned's bastard.  But somehow it's okay to question that. 

Ditto for Sandor being dead and buried.  But somehow it's okay to question that.

34 minutes ago, Nevets said:

If you wish to dispute this, and claim that she is someone else, it is up to you to provide competent evidence to that effect. That is what burden of proof means. 

I owe you nothing, and I find your arrogance off-putting.  Believe what you want.  Maybe we'll see at the end who guessed correctly.   I don't anticipate I will have any trouble admitting I was wrong, if that turns out to be the case.

But if I do choose to have a conversation about this with someone else about my reasons, feel free to interrupt.  Nothing I can do to stop you after all.

34 minutes ago, Nevets said:

It doesn't require actual proof, which is impossible, but it does require giving good reasons to believe it.  So far I have seen nothing except wild speculation that is without textual support or even contradicts actual text.

I would not expect you to provide a fair and balanced summary of your opponent's position.  You just aren't that kind of guy.

34 minutes ago, Nevets said:

The only thing I have seen remotely supporting this contention is the suggestion that the house with the red door was not in Braavos. 

Well.  Thanks for acknowledging that point at least.   There are other points, some of which I'm sure you've seen before.

34 minutes ago, Nevets said:

While there is a good possibility that it is outside Braavos, all that does is establish a presence elsewhere.  There are many possibilities for where and why, some of which have been mentioned on this thread. 

Right.  "That does not necessarily prove".  You could say the same to every single point I raise.  And I know you will. 

Edited April 10, 2023 by Gilbert Green

[Nevets]

32 minutes ago, Gilbert Green said:

Ditto for Jon being Ned's bastard.  But somehow it's okay to question that. 

Ditto for Sandor being dead and buried.  But somehow it's okay to question that.

I owe you nothing, and I find your arrogance off-putting.  Believe what you want.  Maybe we'll see at the end who guessed correctly.   I don't anticipate I will have any trouble admitting I was wrong, if that turns out to be the case.

But if I do choose to have a conversation about this with someone else about my reasons, feel free to interrupt.  Nothing I can do to stop you after all.

I would not expect you to provide a fair and balanced summary of your opponent's position.  You just aren't that kind of guy.

Well.  Thanks for acknowledging that point at least.   There are other points, some of which I'm sure you've seen before.

Right.  "That does not necessarily prove".  You could say the same to every single point I raise.  And I know you will. 

Competent evidence has been presented that Jon is not Ned's bastard and that Sandor is not dead.  I am inclined to believe that evidence.  I have not seen such evidence for the suggestion that Dany is fake.

You have suggested that Dany was cared for by William Dustin, whose death is well established.  You have also suggested that Dany was sold into slavery and purchased by Illyrio, for which there is no evidence whatsoever.

If the proponents of the theory that Dany is fake wish to be taken seriously, they should provide competent evidence to that effect.  I've not seen anything I find convincing, though your opinion may differ.  I do not ask for actual proof.  I do ask for something more than mere speculation.

Edited April 10, 2023 by Nevets

[three-eyed monkey]

8 hours ago, Gilbert Green said:

I accept no "burden of proof".  I may be guessing, but so are you.   There is no double standard for your guesses as opposed to my guesses.

I can give reasons for certain theories, but there is no point discussing them with someone who howls "burden of proof" at me.  Such a person is telling me in advance that he is unwilling to consider any reason I give.  He will always say "that doesn't prove" or "that doesn't necessarily mean".  And he will be right.  It is only a theory.  If he wants proof, he will just have to wait for the books.

But of course he will never apply these standards to the theories he supports, and wants to discuss or speculate about.

You are the one who brought burden of proof into it.

I agree that the same standard should be applied to theories. I'm not guessing that Dany is who we are told, there's plenty of evidence to support that in the text. You are guessing that she is someone else. If you want to develop that guess into a theory, then find the support in the text. That's the same standard, the difference is that your guess is not really supported.

9 hours ago, Gilbert Green said:

I never said you had a burden of disproof.  I only applied this to those whose ambition was to shut down discussion of theories that do not interest them.  You say that's not you, so all is good.  Right?

I'm not trying to shut down any theory, but that doesn't mean I agree with the validity of every theory. I believe Dany is who we are told she is, and I've made my case above. I welcome any theory, but if it's going to be convincing then it needs to be more than a guess. I don't find any of the theories claiming Dany is someone else to be convincing.

9 hours ago, Gilbert Green said:

I never said GRRM had to follow Tolkien.  I mentioned him because you tried to lay down some kind of universal rule of story structure, inspired by platitudes from Disney musicals.  Tolkien did not follow these rules, and GRRM does not have to either.  GRRM can do whatever he likes.  Agreed?

There are universal rules of story-telling and both GRRM and Tolkien do follow them. Take for example the hero's journey arc structure, something Frodo and Dany share. Take for example set-up and pay-off, something that both writers use. These are used by both writers because both writers know what works, they understand the rules of story-telling.

Now, they can still tell different stories and make different points. I believe the point GRRM is making is that the fate of mankind is in the hands of mankind, not the hands of the gods. You then brought Tolkein into it by saying that can't be the case because it has to be down to the gods, which is something Tolkien alludes to in LotR.

I support my position using Jaime and the White Book, and what he says about being free to write what ever he choose. This is not merely about what he writes in the book, it's about him being free to be whatever type of man he wants to be, or at least aspire towards that. You refute that by saying that can't be what it means because it's not down to him, and then you cite Frodo to support your case. If that's your position then you need to find support in ASoIaF because GRRM is making a different point about gods than Tolkien was making.

10 hours ago, Gilbert Green said:

I never expressed any problem with the author's world view. 

It doesn't matter if we agree with it or not. The point he's making is being made in the text in scenes like Jaime and the White Book and that's what matters to the story he's telling. He's putting that stuff in there for a reason. If he wanted to make the point that Jaime is not free to write whatever he wants, then the scene would have been different and the point would have been made that whatever fills the blank page is not down to Jaime, it's down to the gods. But that's not what's in the text.

[Gilbert Green]

2 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

You are the one who brought burden of proof into it.

Only as applied to people who want to shut down discussion.  And you say that is not you.  So it's all good.  Right?

[Gilbert Green]

11 hours ago, Nevets said:

Competent evidence has been presented that Jon is not Ned's bastard and that Sandor is not dead. 

"Competent evidence" is a legal phrase.  For courtrooms.

11 hours ago, Nevets said:

I am inclined to believe that evidence. 

Believe what you want.

11 hours ago, Nevets said:

You have suggested that Dany was cared for by William Dustin, whose death is well established. 

I certainly never suggested he was not dead.

11 hours ago, Nevets said:

You have also suggested that Dany was sold into slavery and purchased by Illyrio, for which there is no evidence whatsoever.

Right.  Because Illyrio being a dealer in Targ-featured slave girls is not even worth a raised eyebrow and a question mark. 

11 hours ago, Nevets said:

If the proponents of the theory that Dany is fake wish to be taken seriously, they should provide competent evidence to that effect. 

Why would I care if you take me seriously?

11 hours ago, Nevets said:

I've not seen anything I find convincing, though your opinion may differ. 

I am happy to agree to disagree.

11 hours ago, Nevets said:

I do not ask for actual proof.  I do ask for something more than mere speculation.

I really think you're just not interested.  And you don't have to be.

[Frey family reunion]

On 4/3/2023 at 11:23 AM, Gilbert Green said:

It's a possibility.  The advantage (if you want to call it that) to this twist is that it does not connect to any of the other threads in the story.  I guess it would appeal to those who want to see the story branch out in random directions indefinitely.  Which in all fairness is what he often seems to be doing so far.

Personally, I would rather see the threads of the story start to come together.  It's not that I object to Dany being a commoner; it's just that none of the major characters in the story are commoners, so it would be hard to connect this twist to any other story threads.  But to each his own.

Like a class war thing?  A commoner striking a blow against the nobility?  By seizing power?  And it ends like Animal Farm?

This twist is going to have to happen quickly if it happens before she invades.  Or at least, I hope that Dany's invasion will begin not too far into the next book.

Personally, I'm a bit weary of GRRM's preoccupation with whores and brothels.  So I hope you are wrong.   But I cannot pretend he does not have such a preoccupation.  So you could be right.

There are different ways that the story can come together.  (Even though I’m not convinced it necessarily needs to).  

As a practical matter, those arguing that nothing will come from this apparent discrepancy are probably going to be right, but perhaps only because GRRM is having trouble ending this series.  My guess is additional plot developments/complications may get thrown by the wayside in an effort to finally finish the series.

Of course that doesn’t mean that GRRM didn’t lay the groundwork for a significant curveball on Dany’s origin.  I 100% believe that’s the whole purpose of giving her a childhood memory that doesn’t jive with what Viserys told her.

 That doesn’t mean that GRRM can pull it off.  And if he can’t, then the easiest thing for him to do is just move on without it.

 It also may be that GRRM intentionally wants to allow for possibilities to exist in the subtext that he will never explicitly come out with in the main story.  Kind of like how he leaves Fire and Blood intentionally ambiguous.  I think GRRM likes the debate.

But having said that, this is why I came up with my current theory.

1.  It’s clear that Rhaella was actually pregnant when she and Viserys left for Dragonstone.  No apparent reason to believe otherwise.

2.  Stannis is of the belief that Robert blamed him for allowing Viserys and his sister to escape Dragonstone.  That makes me believe that Rhaella’s pregnancy probably did not end in a still birth.  I don’t see how that could have occurred without Stannis being aware of it after he took over the Island.

3.  While it’s always possible that Viserys’ sister died en route to Braavos or after they arrived at Braavos, my guess is for a reason stated below, that this is probably not the case, that instead, GRRM may be toying with the idea of a child swap.  But more on that later.

4.  So if in fact Viserys and his biological sister did come to Braavos, if Dany is someone other than his biological sister, than the switch had to have happened late enough for Dany to still have a memory of a location that allowed for a lemon tree outside her window, but early enough for where she had very few explicit memories, which does not enable her to piece together a full coherent memory.

5.  So the switch probably had to happen when Dany was three years old.  And  so most of the time that Dany lived in Braavos was probably when she was four years of age.  Once again, she can form some memories of Braavos, but those memories remain hazy and indistinct.  Which allows for her memory to be susceptible to false information concerning her story.

6.  This would line up for the time period when Oberyn arrives in Braavos to sign the marriage contract with Willem Darry.

7.  So my guess is that is when the switch occurs, when Oberyn arrives in Braavos.  That would be the reason that GRRM is trying to make the reader associate lemons with Dorne. 

8.  And yes, I am also very influenced by the inspiration behind Oberyn’s name.  I think without a doubt, Oberyn was named after the fairy king Oberon from a  Midsummer Night’s Dream.  In Celtic and Irish mythology, fairies are known to swap out children for “changelings”.  Things that look like your child but are in actuality spirits or demons in the form of the child.  And Oberon (along with his wife Titania) were known to be responsible for swapping out the son of an Indian Prince with a changeling.  

Quote

For Oberon is passing fell and wrath

Because that she, as her attendant, hath

A lovely boy stolen from an Indian king.

She never had so sweet a changeling.

And jealous Oberon would have the child

Knight of his train, to trace the forests wild.

But she perforce withholds the lovèd boy,

Crowns him with flowers and makes him all her joy.

9.  So.. I think GRRM is inverting the concept a bit, and instead of focusing his tale on the “stolen” Princess, he’s focusing his tale on the imposter.

10.  Which is why GRRM very early in the story, establishes that the Targaryen lost their dragons, when brother and sister stopped marrying and instead went to war in the Dance of the Dragons.  In other words, the maternal and paternal lines split, the royal family lost half of the necessary bloodline to hatch dragons and never regained it.

11.  My guess is that Dany isn’t of the line of Viserys I (the dragonless) and the daughter of a Lysenian Banker, but instead her bloodlines are the bringing back together of Targaryen bloodlines that split off after the Dance.

12.  Now there are different ways of bringing bloodlines back together, but the easiest way would be through the brothels, which keep getting brought up in the story.   In addition, Dany repeatedly is called a slut and a whore throughout the story.  GRRM may be trying to subtly prepare the reader for the reveal of Dany’s origin.  We also know that Oberyn has a certain fondness for brothels.  Which might be how he comes across Dany.

13.  I’m skeptical that Dany has a Stark parent, there is no particular reason to believe that the Stark bloodline would reignite the Targaryen ability to hatch dragons.  

14  I think you’re right that there is a connection between Jon and Dany, but I think it may be more of a Yin Yang thing.  I don’t necessarily think that GRRM is setting Jon up to be a “dragon”, I think he may be setting Jon up to be a dragon slayer.  But that’s a theory for another day.

 

Edited April 10, 2023 by Frey family reunion

[Nevets]

1 hour ago, Frey family reunion said:

There are different ways that the story can come together.  (Even though I’m not convinced it necessarily needs to).  

As a practical matter, those arguing that nothing will come from this apparent discrepancy are probably going to be right, but perhaps only because GRRM is having trouble ending this series.  My guess is additional plot developments/complications may get thrown by the wayside in an effort to finally finish the series.

Of course that doesn’t mean that GRRM didn’t lay the groundwork for a significant curveball on Dany’s origin.  I 100% believe that’s the whole purpose of giving her a childhood memory that doesn’t jive with what Viserys told her.

 That doesn’t mean that GRRM can pull it off.  And if he can’t, then the easiest thing for him to do is just move on without it.

 It also may be that GRRM intentionally wants to allow for possibilities to exist in the subtext that he will never explicitly come out with in the main story.  Kind of like how he leaves Fire and Blood intentionally ambiguous.  I think GRRM likes the debate.

But having said that, this is why I came up with my current theory.

1.  It’s clear that Rhaella was actually pregnant when she and Viserys left for Dragonstone.  No apparent reason to believe otherwise.

2.  Stannis is of the belief that Robert blamed him for allowing Viserys and his sister to escape Dragonstone.  That makes me believe that Rhaella’s pregnancy probably did not end in a still birth.  I don’t see how that could have occurred without Stannis being aware of it after he took over the Island.

3.  While it’s always possible that Viserys’ sister died en route to Braavos or after they arrived at Braavos, my guess is for a reason stated below, that this is probably not the case, that instead, GRRM may be toying with the idea of a child swap.  But more on that later.

4.  So if in fact Viserys and his biological sister did come to Braavos, if Dany is someone other than his biological sister, than the switch had to have happened late enough for Dany to still have a memory of a location that allowed for a lemon tree outside her window, but early enough for where she had very few explicit memories, which does not enable her to piece together a full coherent memory.

5.  So the switch probably had to happen when Dany was three years old.  And  so most of the time that Dany lived in Braavos was probably when she was four years of age.  Once again, she can form some memories of Braavos, but those memories remain hazy and indistinct.  Which allows for her memory to be susceptible to false information concerning her story.

6.  This would line up for the time period when Oberyn arrives in Braavos to sign the marriage contract with Willem Darry.

7.  So my guess is that is when the switch occurs, when Oberyn arrives in Braavos.  That would be the reason that GRRM is trying to make the reader associate lemons with Dorne. 

8.  And yes, I am also very influenced by the inspiration behind Oberyn’s name.  I think without a doubt, Oberyn was named after the fairy king Oberon from a  Midsummer Night’s Dream.  In Celtic and Irish mythology, fairies are known to swap out children for “changelings”.  Things that look like your child but are in actuality spirits or demons in the form of the child.  And Oberon (along with his wife Titania) were known to be responsible for swapping out the son of an Indian Prince with a changeling.  

9.  So.. I think GRRM is inverting the concept a bit, and instead of focusing his tale on the “stolen” Princess, he’s focusing his tale on the imposter.

10.  Which is why GRRM very early in the story, establishes that the Targaryen lost their dragons, when brother and sister stopped marrying and instead went to war in the Dance of the Dragons.  In other words, the maternal and paternal lines split, the royal family lost half of the necessary bloodline to hatch dragons and never regained it.

11.  My guess is that Dany isn’t of the line of Viserys I (the dragonless) and the daughter of a Lysenian Banker, but instead her bloodlines are the bringing back together of Targaryen bloodlines that split off after the Dance.

12.  Now there are different ways of bringing bloodlines back together, but the easiest way would be through the brothels, which keep getting brought up in the story.   In addition, Dany repeatedly is called a slut and a whore throughout the story.  GRRM may be trying to subtly prepare the reader for the reveal of Dany’s origin.  We also know that Oberyn has a certain fondness for brothels.  Which might be how he comes across Dany.

13.  I’m skeptical that Dany has a Stark parent, there is no particular reason to believe that the Stark bloodline would reignite the Targaryen ability to hatch dragons.  

14  I think you’re right that there is a connection between Jon and Dany, but I think it may be more of a Yin Yang thing.  I don’t necessarily think that GRRM is setting Jon up to be a “dragon”, I think he may be setting Jon up to be a dragon slayer.  But that’s a theory for another day.

 

Why all the folderol?  Why would Oberyn go to all this trouble to switch babies?  What's he hoping to accomplish?

Why is Viserys going along with it?  Hell, why is Darry as well?  What's in it for them?

Where did fDany come from,?  If a brothel, why no weird memories (multiple female caretakers, for example).  Why no weird, fragmentary memories of any kind?  GRRM is good about giving hints like that.

Where is the real Dany?

[Frey family reunion]

6 minutes ago, Nevets said:

Why all the folderol?  Why would Oberyn go to all this trouble to switch babies?  What's he hoping to accomplish?

Why is Viserys going along with it?  Hell, why is Darry as well?  What's in it for them?

Where did fDany come from,?  If a brothel, why no weird memories (multiple female caretakers, for example).  Why no weird, fragmentary memories of any kind?  GRRM is good about giving hints like that.

Where is the real Dany?

That's easy, the Targaryen Princess is payment to convince Dorne to enter into the marriage alliance with Viserys.  They leave Dany with Darry and Viserys to use her to hoodwink someone to allow for Viserys to obtain an army, while they keep the real thing.

Or in this case, they give the real thing to their coconspirator, Tyrosh.  And she becomes the green haired daughter of the Archon of Tyrosh.

Which is why Dany is so disposable that she's sold off to a Dothraki horselord, in an attempt to get a Dothraki horde to do their dirty work in Westeros.  They know she's not the real Targaryen Princess.

As for the second part, the switch is made when Dany is probably three years of age.  Think back to when you were three years old and see how much you can remember.  My guess is not much if anything.  So Dany's explicit memories of her time before Braavos, are almost non-existant.  The only thing that stands out for her is a lemon tree outside of her house.  Something that didnt' exist in Braavos.

But since she's told by Viserys that she was brought to Braavos directly after her birth she just assumes that all of her childhood memories took place in Braavos.

Edited April 10, 2023 by Frey family reunion

[Gilbert Green]

On 4/6/2023 at 12:23 PM, Mourning Star said:

That Stork of a man!

Thanks for the intro, the irony of trying to stop a prophesy only to cause it has roots as far back as storytelling goes, no doubt.

There is clearly something important for us to learn about the ghost of high heart’s prophesy and the tragedy of Summerhall.

I don’t hate the theory and am open to reading more if you feel like sharing.

Let me focus on Bonifer for a bit.

He is first mentioned in Book 2, when he surrenders to King Joffrey; and is also mentioned in the appendix of Book 3, where we learn his last name, and he is called a "famed knight".    The rest we learn from Jaime in Book 4; and from Barristan in Book 5.  Both Jaime and Barristan refer to a promising young tournament knight from the stormlands who gave up jousting and turned pious.  Barristan does not name this young knight, but there could hardly be two such people.

GRRM is being awfully coy about Bonifer.  Why plant those details in widely separate chapters two books apart, and force the attentive reader to piece them together?  It makes you think you are on the scent of some mystery, and that these are not just random details thrown out by an author addicted to worldbuilding.

Barristan connects the nameless knight to Rhaella, in the following way.  First he says that Rhaella was always mindful of her duty.  Then he remembers something, and says "although ....", as if he were remembering an exception when she was not mindful of her duty.  Then, after a pause or elipse, he goes on to say only that she was smitten with a young tournament knight, and that he, though below her station, loved her in return.

If Rhaella had merely been smitten, but had not done anything about her passion, then no-one could say she was not mindful of her duty.  I guess, therefore, that something more must have happened.  I am tempted to guess that Bonifer and Rhaella did not merely love pure and chaste from afar.

Also why mention the love affair at all if nothing came of it?  It was 50 years ago, Rhaella has been dead for 16 years, and Bonifer must be close to 70.  Who cares, then, if Rhaella was not a virgin at the time of her forced marriage to her creepy brother?   Her husband, despite his obvious preference for the wives of noblemen, might care a little, but he's now been dead for 17 years as well.  The only way this would matter, storywise, is if Rhaella was actually pregnant on her wedding day.

It could be that they fooled around after the wedding as well, but I think that Barristan's words weigh against that.  He says that their love was brief, that Bonifer hung up his lance after the wedding; and again that Rhaella was always being mindful of her duty with that one brief exception.

So the next question is, does the timing work?  Could Rhaegar have been conceived before the forced wedding, and born a mere 8 or 9 months after the forced wedding?  I believe the answer was "yes" at least in the sense that nothing rules it out.  Rhaegar seems to have been born about a year into the marriage, give or take a few months either way.

Jaime and Barristan have not-entirely-consistent information about Bonifer hanging up his lance and becoming pious.  Barristan says he hung up his lance the day of the wedding and "afterwards" became pious; which could be read as saying that he stopped jousting first and became pious later.  Jaime, who seems not know of the Rhaella connection, merely says that something happened to him -- a disgrace, or a defeat, or a near brush with death.

Lost love can be traumatic, but it seems to me that Jaime's words --  "disgrace" / "defeat" / "near brush with death", imply something beyond the story we learn from Barristan.   The closest connection, assuming Bonifer & Rhaella did naughty things together, is "disgrace", and that only if the sin becomes widely known.   But what of "near brush with death"?   Curiously enough, a mysterious tragedy did occur around that time, or not too long "afterwards":  Summerhall.   The conflagration left only few survivors, who refused to speak of it.  Was one of those survivors Ser Bonifer, inspiring Jaime's vague idea that he is haunted by a mysterious tragedy?

Summerhall seems to have involved a sorcerous ritual involving dragon eggs and wildfire, and seemed to have been based on the premise that Rhaegar was the Prince that was Promised, which in turn was based in part on the premise that Rhaegar united the lines of Aerys and Rhaella.  But what if he did not unite the lines of Aerys and Rhaella?  Whose fault would that be?  Maybe Bonifer's?  Did Bonifer mess up the sorcery?  Hard to judge because we know next to nothing about Summerhall.

After Rhaegar's birth Rhaella has a string of miscarriages, still births, and sickly and/or deformed children, as we are told in TWOIAF.  This is more or less what you would expect from two consecutive generations of full sibling incest, especially if both parents were already not particularly healthy.   But Aerys had a different idea -- his ego would not admit that these sickly beings sprang from his own loins.  Hence he falsely accused Rhaella of adultery.   This strikes me as an ironic clue.    It was his first child -- the healthy child -- Rhaegar -- who was in fact not his.

Eventually Rhaella lucked out (sort of) with Viserys, who was physically healthy, but mad.  I argued before in this thread that Viserys and any sibling of Viserys (to the extent that they were viable) ought to be very similar too each other, because they share so much of each other's genes.  Viserys and Aerys seem to have been very similar, in height, feature, and personality.  Neither, at any rate, are described as tall.   Rhaegar was taller, at least, than Viserys, and moreover was a skilled warrior and tournament knight (unlike Viserys or Aerys).  Where did these traits come from, if not from Bonifer, a "stork of a man" who was also a top tournament knight? 

We know Bonifer won at least one royal tournament, because, per Barristan, he crowned Rhaella his queen of love and beauty.

I'll stop here now, without getting into thorny issues of whether Bonifer is a descendant of Dunk, or how Rhaegar could go about uniting the lines of Aerys and Rhaella, after realizing he was not TPTWP.

Edited April 11, 2023 by Gilbert Green

[Gilbert Green]

9 hours ago, Nevets said:

Where did fDany come from,?  If a brothel, why no weird memories (multiple female caretakers, for example).  Why no weird, fragmentary memories of any kind?  GRRM is good about giving hints like that.

Have you forgotten the lemon tree already?

[Nevets]

1 hour ago, Gilbert Green said:

Have you forgotten the lemon tree already?

Unfortunately no.  Sadly, it is seared into my brain.  But if you're going to mention brothels and/or slavery in Daenerys's past, I'm going to need more from her memories than a lemon tree.  And in general, I'm going to need more than wild speculation and tenuous connections.

As for William Dustin, I meant that his death during the fight at the Tower of Joy was well established so he couldn't be Dany's caretaker.  I thought that was clear from context.  Evidently not.

[Alester Florent]

15 hours ago, Nevets said:

Why all the folderol?  Why would Oberyn go to all this trouble to switch babies?  What's he hoping to accomplish?

Why is Viserys going along with it?  Hell, why is Darry as well?  What's in it for them?

Where did fDany come from,?  If a brothel, why no weird memories (multiple female caretakers, for example).  Why no weird, fragmentary memories of any kind?  GRRM is good about giving hints like that.

Where is the real Dany?

The theory seems to be that there was no "real Dany". There was also no storm on Dragonstone, and Rhaella died for some other reason. Possibly in childbirth with the child being stillborn.

I don't buy for a second that there was no storm on Dragonstone. Apart from anything else, the number of times Dany calls herself "Stormborn" you'd expect Barristan or Jorah at some point to say "out of interest, your grace, why do you call yourself that?" and on being told it's because of a great storm at her birth go "uhhhh".

Stannis's failure to capture Viserys, which he believes was not his fault, is otherwise unexplained.

As to the baby switch for Dany, while this is not impossible it seems like an unnecessary complication and  it's an awful lot to throw out everything we know about the background of one of the story's key characters, on the basis of an inconsistency about lemon trees.

 

[Mourning Star]

51 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

The theory seems to be that there was no "real Dany". There was also no storm on Dragonstone, and Rhaella died for some other reason. Possibly in childbirth with the child being stillborn.

There are storms all the time in the narrow sea, the question is if there was a storm that could rip blocks and gargoyles from the walls of a castle built from nearly indestructible fused stone where a maester is quoted as saying the gargoyles were there long before him and would be long after him.

THE STORMS THAT blow up the narrow sea are infamous throughout the Seven Kingdoms, and in the Nine Free Cities as well. Though they may arise in any season, seafarers say that the worst of them come each autumn, forming in the warm waters of the Summer Sea south of the Stepstones, then roaring north across those bleak and stony islands. More than half continue north by northwest, according to the archives at the Citadel, sweeping over Cape Wrath and the rainwood, gathering strength (and moisture) as they cross the waters of Shipbreaker Bay before slamming into Storm's End on Durran's Point.

51 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

I don't buy for a second that there was no storm on Dragonstone. Apart from anything else, the number of times Dany calls herself "Stormborn" you'd expect Barristan or Jorah at some point to say "out of interest, your grace, why do you call yourself that?" and on being told it's because of a great storm at her birth go "uhhhh".

The issue isn't that there was a storm at all, it's one that destroys an island fortress that has lasted for hundreds of years and shows no signs of having been destroyed, especially when the art of fusing stone needed to repair it has been lost.

Viserys came upon her as sudden as a summer storm, his horse rearing beneath him as he reined up too hard. "You dare!" he screamed at her. "You give commands to me? To me?" He vaulted off the horse, stumbling as he landed. His face was flushed as he struggled back to his feet. He grabbed her, shook her. "Have you forgotten who you are? Look at you. Look at you!"

51 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

Stannis's failure to capture Viserys, which he believes was not his fault, is otherwise unexplained.

I don't know what you are trying to say here.

Summer storms aren't mentioned often in the series, but I do think it's notable when they are.

"He did strike His Grace, that's so. It was a fit of wroth, no more. A summer storm. The mob near killed us all."
"In the days of the Targaryens, a man who struck one of the blood royal would lose the hand he struck him with," observed the Red Viper of Dorne. "Did the dwarf regrow his little hand, or did you White Swords forget your duty?"

51 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

As to the baby switch for Dany, while this is not impossible it seems like an unnecessary complication and  it's an awful lot to throw out everything we know about the background of one of the story's key characters, on the basis of an inconsistency about lemon trees.

It's not just the lemon trees. 

"Viserys was Mad Aerys's son, just so. Daenerys … Daenerys is quite different."

Edited April 11, 2023 by Mourning Star