Jon Married Val

[Corvo the Crow]

55 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

We can be sure that those customs include that people know they marry. And as I said - marriage as a concept is public. Yet your curious examples of Jon and Val being married revolve around them doing stuff in private or semi-private contexts. There is no chance for them being married that way.

We can be sure not everyone in the wide world would know it, nor is it necessary for your marriage to be known globally, if Westeros is global and not flat that is. I very much doubt that everyone in the forty thousand host knows who is married to who etc. Those in the close circle would know, which in their case amounts to Tormund.

55 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

And, as I try to say here - I don't think the wildlings believe in romantic shit like 'marriage is for life'. If you can steal a woman, you can also discard her. And if you are free as a wildling then as a woman you can also leave your man if you dare. So whatever their concept of marriage is, it must be less restrictive than the standard model.

Agree on this.

55 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Jon never stole Val. That's just a fantasy in your mind. And he also never stole Ygritte, and she knew it. They just use it to manipulate him. Of course, the way how Jon treated Ygritte piqued her interest in him - she is into this exotic little plaything from down south - but even she must be aware that neither Jon nor his buddies attacked and killed her group because they wanted to steal themselves some women.

Jon stole Val as he did Ygritte. Tormund wasn’t manipulative at all but geniunely found Jon’s actions incredulous.

55 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

She also know that the crows don't have wives and father no children, so Jon Snow most certainly never stole her. Nor Val, who also knows who and what Jon Snow is.

They also know crows steal into beds of Wildling women.

55 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

They are patriarchal but they are also a liberal society. They do have fighting women and especially they have the power and strength and standing to do what they want. I'm not sure why a woman like Ygritte would be even protected, since she is a spear wife herself, but Val actually stealing Jarl kind of implies that women (warriors) among the wildlings treat men they fancy like men treat women they want to be their property/pets.

Really? Val stole Jarl? When? You accuse me of fantasy but at least I am able to back my claims, there’s no evidence on Val stealing Jarl what so ever. We have already established wildling women aren’t property like you claim to be but are quite free, even sleeping around as they like without being “stolen”, Val may very well do the same as Ygritte, accept who she wants without a stealing.

55 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

LOL, again, this doesn't even make sense in a wildlings-only scenario. So I'm a war chief and raid some neighboring village. I kill some weaklings and drag some ugly girl out of a burning building because I'm not a total ass. She is clearly mine now. Does this mean I'm stuck with her as my fucking wife even if I have not the slightest interest in her? Just because she might suddenly have the hots for me?

No society would work like that.

And her being ugly is relevant how? Ygon oldfather had 19 wives so you aren’t stuck with one, stealing her doesn’t necessarily mean you’ll have to bed her as well.

55 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Val was never stolen by Jon. She was always the prisoner of Stannis Baratheon.

Can’t add quote being on the phone but in the eyes of Stannis men and Watch it was Jon who captured them. Also he stole her once he broke her out of her apartments and sent off to Tormund. Stannis was gone but Mel was still there with her guards and even Stannis’ squire. So no, he stole her.

 

55 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

mean, please, take a step back and put the text before you fantasies.

Fantasies like Val stealing Jarl?

 

55 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

I've just gone back to read this stuff - this is banter, not serious. And Val herself makes it clear she is going to geld Jon if her were trying to steal her. She is no man's wife at that point, and has likely never been stolen before (since she actually stole Jarl). Val also does acknowledge Jon's vows and seems to respect them.

Is it why she constantly teases and flirts, her respect for his vows? What about Tormund? Still trying to manipulate Jon? To what end? Jon is the only friend they have, manipulating him into a tough spot is more harm then gain. And why does he tell Toregg of, for fear of having a second daughter? Threaening of gelding is nothing to put off, the risk is always there and if Toregg is anything like his father he may even benefit from losing  some of his member.

Edited March 9, 2023 by Corvo the Crow

[GZ Bloodraven]

Is the suggestion that Jon stole her because he, symbolically being the wall, killed Jarl and Wun Wun killed Patrek? Isn't the concept of stealing "I kill everyone else who wants you because I want you" or do I misunderstand what it means to be stolen? Val is obviously more interested in Jon than she is in her other potential matches, but that's a pretty low bar. And we would have seen the wedding in Jon's POV had they wedded: that would be a cheap reveal in Winds or Spring, like, "Oh yeah, we just skipped over this part last time, Jon and Val got married." I also do think there is something intentional about stealing: I don't think Jon killed Jarl as the wall so that he would get to be with Val. Maybe he did, maybe Jon is hornier and crazier and more of a symbolic wall manifestation than I thought.

1 hour ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Fantasies like Val stealing Jarl?

 

I'm pretty sure in ASOS, when we meet Val, we learn that Val stole Jarl. 

[Corvo the Crow]

46 minutes ago, GZ Bloodraven said:

I'm pretty sure in ASOS, when we meet Val, we learn that Val stole Jarl. 

 

You can search for yourself, it yields nothing of the sorts. It is as I see it, someone's fantasy making it's way into the wiki and from there the misconception taking on wings, spreading everywhere. We read that Jarl is Val's pet but that's it. We know from Ygritte and the boy that visited her village wildlings do have sex without stealing ever involved.

 

JRRT & GRRM Searcher | RR引得 (searcherr.work)

A Search of Ice and Fire

 

46 minutes ago, GZ Bloodraven said:

Is the suggestion that Jon stole her because he, symbolically being the wall, killed Jarl and Wun Wun killed Patrek? Isn't the concept of stealing "I kill everyone else who wants you because I want you" or do I misunderstand what it means to be stolen? Val is obviously more interested in Jon than she is in her other potential matches, but that's a pretty low bar. And we would have seen the wedding in Jon's POV had they wedded: that would be a cheap reveal in Winds or Spring, like, "Oh yeah, we just skipped over this part last time, Jon and Val got married." I also do think there is something intentional about stealing: I don't think Jon killed Jarl as the wall so that he would get to be with Val. Maybe he did, maybe Jon is hornier and crazier and more of a symbolic wall manifestation than I thought.

2 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

No, Wun Wun killing Patrek doesn't matter that much as Val is already Jon's at that point. Patrek tried to steal Val but failed.

There are several things of Jon stealing Val. Off the top of my head  among things that I've noticed: Wall being Jon's and Wall killing Jarl may or may not be the first, because though some don't accept it saying Jon wasn't the LC at the time. However Jon has every right to Wall as I mentioned earlier he is a Stark, he is LC's steward(Mormont is probably dead at the time), he takes on command of Wall defends it etc.

Second is Stannis coming to battle, it is taken as Jon captured Aemon battleborn and the Horn of Joramun, though Val isn't mentioned, these are all together. He also stands guard with his sword drawn when wildlings are getting slain left and right I've not added that quote before so here:

Quote

 

Jon had done more than well himself, to hear Grenn tell it. Yet even capturing the Horn of Winter and a wildling prince had not been enough for Ser Alliser Thorne and his friends, who still named him turncloak. Though Maester Aemon said his wound was healing well, Jon bore other scars, deeper than the ones around his eye. He grieves for his wildling girl, and for his brothers.

 

 

Third is Jon stole Val from the King's Tower where Stannis was, to send her to Tormund. Stannis had left at this point but Mel is still there with some men left as her guard and even King's own squire, Devan. 

Fourth, though this is actually part of the third is Val and Jon bot acknowledges her to be Jon's captive. We know from Ygritte that taking a woman captive is essentially stealing in the wildling's eyes. Jon tries to explain Tormund that he took Ygritte a captive but in Tormund's eyes as it is in Ygritte's, it is stealing. The first time this happens Jon is unaware of wildling customs, but still doesn't prevent him from doing it again even after learning it. He really can't get no free passes for this recurring mistake, he knows now that captive = steal and yet steals her away from the tower and makes her his captive after.

 

 

 

Edited March 9, 2023 by Corvo the Crow

[GZ Bloodraven]

3 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

You can search for yourself, it yields nothing of the sorts. It is as I see it, someone's fantasy making it's way into the wiki and from there the misconception taking on wings, spreading everywhere. We read that Jarl is Val's pet but that's it. We know from Ygritte and the boy that visited her village wildlings do have sex without stealing ever involved.

 

I am new to this forum; I did not realize you can't trust the wiki. That's actually a massive problem, I will have to get used to that. Different fandoms, different rules for research, I guess.

6 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Fourth, though this is actually part of the third is Val and Jon bot acknowledges her to be Jon's captive. We know from Ygritte that taking a woman captive is essentially stealing in the wildling's eyes. Jon tries to explain Tormund that he took Ygritte a captive but in Tormund's eyes as it is in Ygritte's, it is stealing. The first time this happens Jon is unaware of wildling customs, but still doesn't prevent him from doing it again even after learning it. He really can't get no free passes for this recurring mistake, he knows now that captive = steal and yet steals her away from the tower and makes her his captive after.

 

This actually makes sense: in a super technical sense, Jon stole Val. It just doesn't look like that because everyone else is still in the picture and fawning over her, but she's now his. I still don't really get the married part tbh, but the "Jon stole Val" part makes more sense.

[Corvo the Crow]

Just now, GZ Bloodraven said:

I am new to this forum; I did not realize you can't trust the wiki. That's actually a massive problem, I will have to get used to that. Different fandoms, different rules for research, I guess.

8 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

You can trust the wiki for most cases but in situations such as this that aren't cut clear, better to check the source material. 

[Corvo the Crow]

Accidentally post before replying this

2 minutes ago, GZ Bloodraven said:

This actually makes sense: in a super technical sense, Jon stole Val. It just doesn't look like that because everyone else is still in the picture and fawning over her, but she's now his. I still don't really get the married part tbh, but the "Jon stole Val" part makes more sense.

No Jon stealing Val doesn't need to be a super techical sense because we know he stole Ygritte plain and simple, same applies to Val.

Marriage part is a suggestion of a possibility: Jon has already stolen two women, Ygritte and Val and actually stole Val more than once if you want to get too technical about it, but is unaware of the situation. It is understandable he can't get it with Ygritte, being a stranger but after he has spent so much time with wildlings and him having stolen Ygritte explained to him over and over and over again by Ygritte and Tormund and perhaps who knows else off-page, he still doesn't understand that his situation with Val is exactly the same. So it's a suggestion that just as he failed to understand that he stole them, perhaps he also married with Val in the eyes of the wildlings but fails to understand.

There are a few other things that make this a possibility as well. Tormund, wondering that Jon isn't giving the lords kind of kisses to Ygritte that if a man doesn't want a woman, he shouldn't steal her. Sometime between Jon departing Mance's camp to climb the wall and going to Mance for a parlay, Longspear Ryk steals Munda, as Tormund tells us.At this time they aren't married. Battle happens and Tormund escapes and the next time we see him again, we learn that Munda took Longspear Ryk to husband, this gives the suggestion that despite being stolen, it is Munda's choice to take him to husband or not. So if a man doesn't want a woman, he shouldn't steal it and it's the woman who takes to husband the man who stole her, not the man who takes her to wife by stealing her. Jon has already stolen her, she may take him to husband. 

 

 

[GZ Bloodraven]

2 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Jon has already stolen two women, Ygritte and Val and actually stole Val more than once if you want to get too technical about it, but is unaware of the situation.

This is what I meant about the "super technical" part. Like, the wildlings (and Jon) haven't realized that what he's doing with Val is, culturally, stealing her. The marriage thing is about the cross-cultural gap, I understand: Jon gets the wildlings more than most southerners, but he's stolen Val like 3 times, and so if Val recognizes that he keeps stealing her, she could consider them married. Is that right? Cuz that makes much more sense: Jon already has an "in" cuz he stole her by making her his captive, not Stannis', and now she just has to be like "yeah, we're married, he stole me, he's cute" and their married cuz the wildling bar for marriage seems pretty low.

[Corvo the Crow]

23 minutes ago, GZ Bloodraven said:

This is what I meant about the "super technical" part. Like, the wildlings (and Jon) haven't realized that what he's doing with Val is, culturally, stealing her. The marriage thing is about the cross-cultural gap, I understand: Jon gets the wildlings more than most southerners, but he's stolen Val like 3 times, and so if Val recognizes that he keeps stealing her, she could consider them married. Is that right? Cuz that makes much more sense: Jon already has an "in" cuz he stole her by making her his captive, not Stannis', and now she just has to be like "yeah, we're married, he stole me, he's cute" and their married cuz the wildling bar for marriage seems pretty low.

I think that Tormund has realized and by best steal her quick, comments on Jon's lack of the consummation of his stealing as was the case with Ygritte. He even tells Toregg no. 

She can consider them married perhaps, yes. We know almost nothing about wildling marriage practices and what we do know is not shown to us plainly and clearly, like, how many people has even noticed that it is Munda who takes Ryk to husband even though it was him who stole her.

You must also take into account that during these stealings, she wasn't uninterruptedly in Jon's care, Jon has taken her if we accept that Jon delivered the horn and the prince to Stannis, but eventually she becomes Stannis' captive before Jon stealing her away from the tower, meaning that Stannis has also stolen her in the wildling sense. She even accepts to marry whoever Stannis chooses in exchange for Mance's life.

 

Edited March 9, 2023 by Corvo the Crow

[Nadden]

On 3/5/2023 at 10:29 AM, Craving Peaches said:

and once when describing men's breath mingling with a horses' during Gared's execution. So the only other time where two people's breath is mingling it is related to marriage. So I think it is quite significant.

In Bran I, Gared is indirectly compared with the length of the sword “Ice” and the width of “Ice” is as wide across as a man’s hand. Horses and time are also measured with hands.

So “Ice”, a symbolic time piece is associated with the oathbreaker and a horse.

Gared also seems to symbolize the lower casting mold for “Ice”. A casting mold is made of greasy sand in a box frame with an imprint of the sword. 

Ragged, like the right margin of this post, can be used to describe the imprint in the sand.

And the negative imprint in the sand is like the opposite of the sword.

Thus, oathbreaker could be considered a negative impression of Oathkeeper.

And recall Oathkeeper is one of the two swords that “Ice” is split into.

So Gared, ragged and greasy, bound to a wall and a height the same length as “Ice” sounds like the drag component of an “Ice” casting mold. Gared in reverse (deraG) is also a homophone for “drag”. 
 

Cope is the top half of the casting mold. And “cope” goes nicely with a horse. Horse “cope” or horscope. Horoscope is a time diagram of the heavens, showing the relative position of planets and the signs of the zodiac, for use in calculating births, foretelling events in a person's life, etc.

Horse =  honor     = Oathkeeper  = cope

Time?

 

Gared = dishonor= Oathbreaker = drag

Sand?

[Corvo the Crow]

It just occured to me that in Dune, Paul Atreides kills Jamis and because he killed him, Paul becomes, by Fremen custom, the husband of Harah, Jamis' wife and becomes the father of Harah's two childen. Jamis himself had killed another Fremen, Harah's first husband and that's how he became Harah's husband, in fact one of her two children was fathered by her first husband and the other by Jamis, her second husband. Considering that GRRM has taken a whole lot of things from Dune, Val asking whether Jon killed Jarl becomes a lot more important for her as it may instantly make her Jon's wife in the eyes of the Wildlings, the Free Folk just like Paul instantly became Harah's husband in the eyes of Fremen with a single stroke of the Chrysknife.