Your Most Hated ASOIAF theory

[Queen Sansa Stark]

Jon and Dany romance. No I don't believe that Jon Snow, who full on says fire is a cruel way to die would fall in love with a girl who repeatedly puts people on fire with her dragons. 

[StarkTullies]

10 hours ago, Queen Sansa Stark said:

Jon and Dany romance. No I don't believe that Jon Snow, who full on says fire is a cruel way to die would fall in love with a girl who repeatedly puts people on fire with her dragons. 

100% agree.

First, incest.  Jon is a Targaryen, but he wasn't raised a Targaryen and he doesn't think like a Targaryen.  It is not "in his blood" to be disgusting: Targaryen incest comes from their elitist notion that they are racially superior (Dragons did not mate with the beasts of the field, and Targaryens did not mingle their blood with that of lesser men).  Jon doesn't think like that.

Second, if mass-murdering psychopaths like Drogo and Daario are Dany's "type", Jon certainly isn't.

Third, I love Jon and I don't love Dany.  Even removing the incest issue, Jon deserves better than Dany.

Fourth, who knows what state Jon will be in when he rises from the dead.  Maybe he shouldn't have a romance with anybody (and that's not even taking into account his vows).

Lastly, this:

Three mounts must you ride . . . one to bed and one to dread and one to love

I firmly believe this refers to the number of Dany's sex partners, and that is not because my mind is in the gutter.  "Mounting" is a frequently used term for sex in Dany's chapters.  More importantly, one mount is meant to be loved, one mount is meant to be dreaded, and another mount is meant to be bedded?  How does Dany "bed" a mount if it is referring to anything else?

So Dany already had her three mounts: Drogo (loves), Daario (beds), Hizdahr (dreads).  She's done, so thankfully Jon won't be added to that list.  Of course they can "fall in love" without having sex... but I really, really hope there is no Jon/Dany romance.

[Queen Sansa Stark]

While I am on the topic, I don't like the theory of Jon, Dany, and Tyrion being the three heads of the dragon and working together to defeat the White Walkers either. Firstly, if the book series was only about defeating the White Walkers then it would be called a Song of Ice, but it's called a Song of Ice and Fire. Meaning there is a fire threat just as much as an ice threat. And we know who the fire threat is, GRRM already said it multiple times. Secondly the three heads of a dragon theory suggest that fire is needed to defeat ice, but GRRM has said that magic is not the answer and it will not solve an issue. The white walkers where defeated before without the help of dragons so why would that work now? If the white walkers will be defeated it won't happen through violence. That is not how GRRM operates. He values the pen over the sword. Meaning it's likely a pact will be written with the White Walkers in order for them to stop, and the one to do that will be Bran, and not Jon, Dany, and Tyrion. 

[Queen Sansa Stark]

28 minutes ago, StarkTullies said:

100% agree.

First, incest.  Jon is a Targaryen, but he wasn't raised a Targaryen and he doesn't think like a Targaryen.  It is not "in his blood" to be disgusting: Targaryen incest comes from their elitist notion that they are racially superior (Dragons did not mate with the beasts of the field, and Targaryens did not mingle their blood with that of lesser men).  Jon doesn't think like that.

Second, if mass-murdering psychopaths like Drogo and Daario are Dany's "type", Jon certainly isn't.

Third, I love Jon and I don't love Dany.  Even removing the incest issue, Jon deserves better than Dany.

Fourth, who knows what state Jon will be in when he rises from the dead.  Maybe he shouldn't have a romance with anybody (and that's not even taking into account his vows).

Lastly, this:

Three mounts must you ride . . . one to bed and one to dread and one to love

I firmly believe this refers to the number of Dany's sex partners, and that is not because my mind is in the gutter.  "Mounting" is a frequently used term for sex in Dany's chapters.  More importantly, one mount is meant to be loved, one mount is meant to be dreaded, and another mount is meant to be bedded?  How does Dany "bed" a mount if it is referring to anything else?

So Dany already had her three mounts: Drogo (loves), Daario (beds), Hizdahr (dreads).  She's done, so thankfully Jon won't be added to that list.  Of course they can "fall in love" without having sex... but I really, really hope there is no Jon/Dany romance.

I am confident we won't get a Dany and Jon romance. Simply because it is expected and cliché route to go in a typical medieval fantasy book series, and ASOIAF is not that, GRRM wants to subvert archetypes and typical storylines. Instead of them being lovers the more likely thing to happen between them is a conflict. GRRM loves the Iliad of Homer. Hector vs. Achilles. The defender vs. the invader. The ones who naturally fit these roles in ASOIAF are Jon and Dany. 

[House Cambodia]

36 minutes ago, StarkTullies said:

Fourth, who knows what state Jon will be in when he rises from the dead.  Maybe he shouldn't have a romance with anybody (and that's not even taking into account his vows).

I strongly agree with this. One of the things I most disliked about the TV series is how the resurrected Jon Snow was exactly the same as the pre-dead dude. Whilst Jayne Poole fancied Beric before he was killed the first time, post-death no one suggested either he or Lady Stoneheart were 'shaggable'. Jon ought to return minus a chunk of his humanity and not be in any state to enter into a romantic relationship.

[Daeron the Daring]

6 hours ago, StarkTullies said:

First, incest.  Jon is a Targaryen, but he wasn't raised a Targaryen and he doesn't think like a Targaryen.  It is not "in his blood" to be disgusting: Targaryen incest comes from their elitist notion that they are racially superior (Dragons did not mate with the beasts of the field, and Targaryens did not mingle their blood with that of lesser men).  Jon doesn't think like that.

OG Jon would be romantically invested in the person he thinks is her sister by this point. Not to mention that avunculate marriages are literally a thing in the lore.

Edited March 10 by Daeron the Daring

[YeniAy_Ottoman]

Bran ate Jojen. I don't think there is any reason to think that something like this happened because we don't see Jojen for a page or two and the boy is scared, but there are people who believe and say this for years.

[A Bong of Ice and Fire]

What I hate most is all the YouTubers saying The Winds of Winter is never coming out and the series will not be finished. I hate that negativity. My gut tells me TWoW will be out in the relatively near future, and the series will be finished.

[The Vanguard]

The Blackfyre theory about fAegon. Not because it is incorrect, but because it is too obvious. I like to think that there is more than that. Like Illyrio being the grandson of Aerion Brightflame, and Serra being a Blackfyre.

Edited March 15 by The Vanguard

[sifth]

Varys being a Targ, who shaves his head bald. I just hate this theory, though I'm not really happy that fAegon exists either, so what do I know.

[Daeron the Daring]

1 hour ago, A Bong of Ice and Fire said:

What I hate most is all the YouTubers saying The Winds of Winter is never coming out and the series will not be finished. I hate that negativity. My gut tells me TWoW will be out in the relatively near future, and the series will be finished.

Goddaym, time is relative.

[ATaleofSalt&Onions]

22 hours ago, sifth said:

Varys being a Targ, who shaves his head bald. I just hate this theory, though I'm not really happy that fAegon exists either, so what do I know.

I don’t really understand why shaving his head would be necessary when everyone believes he is from Lys, as he says. Even commoners there have Valyrian features so what would be suspicious about him having silver hair?

[Lord of Raventree Hall]

On 3/16/2024 at 8:23 AM, sifth said:

Varys being a Targ, who shaves his head bald. I just hate this theory, though I'm not really happy that fAegon exists either, so what do I know.

Varys is a Blackfyre not a Targ  so don’t worry. 

[SeanF]

On 3/10/2024 at 1:29 AM, Queen Sansa Stark said:

Jon and Dany romance. No I don't believe that Jon Snow, who full on says fire is a cruel way to die would fall in love with a girl who repeatedly puts people on fire with her dragons. 

Book Jon is ruthlessly pragmatic.  He threatened to burn Gilly’s child.  He's prepared to kill child hostages, if he has to.  He puts his enemies in ice cells.  Like any general, I can’t see him rejecting the use of fire in war, either, and I doubt if he’d have disapproved of the end of Master Kraznys.  As to “types”, Ygritte was a murderer, but he remembers her fondly.

What he did hate was seeing a man he came to respect (Mance), being subject to a cruel death.  Would he have intervened if he knew it was Rattleshirt?  That seems unlikely.

Edited March 17 by SeanF

[SeanF]

On 3/10/2024 at 11:26 AM, Queen Sansa Stark said:

While I am on the topic, I don't like the theory of Jon, Dany, and Tyrion being the three heads of the dragon and working together to defeat the White Walkers either. Firstly, if the book series was only about defeating the White Walkers then it would be called a Song of Ice, but it's called a Song of Ice and Fire. Meaning there is a fire threat just as much as an ice threat. And we know who the fire threat is, GRRM already said it multiple times. Secondly the three heads of a dragon theory suggest that fire is needed to defeat ice, but GRRM has said that magic is not the answer and it will not solve an issue. The white walkers where defeated before without the help of dragons so why would that work now? If the white walkers will be defeated it won't happen through violence. That is not how GRRM operates. He values the pen over the sword. Meaning it's likely a pact will be written with the White Walkers in order for them to stop, and the one to do that will be Bran, and not Jon, Dany, and Tyrion. 

I think that violence will be a part of the answer, if not the entire answer.  The Others are not just misunderstood, but an actual danger.

Sometimes violence is necessary, as with the Eastern slavers.

[House Cambodia]

I dislike theories that presume the endgame is one where the Forces of Good defeat the Forces of Evil. I think GRRM has done enough to show us he doesn't think that way (a la LOTR). R'hllor and The Great Other must remain beliefs in some people's minds, not objective realities. It's still an open question as to who is on each side anyway - full kudos to him for still screwing with us after all these years and pages.

Connected to that, I'm mistrustful of theories in which the endgame is some cosmic conflict in which humans are mere pawns - GRRM is serious about "the human heart in conflict with itself". Dany will have agency to choose whether or not to give up her 'god given' rights; Bran will have agency to choose whether to follow Bloodraven/the Weirwood Net or not, Undead Jon will be torn between his lingering humanity and what he's turned into, Arya whether to reject her assassin-conditioning, Jamie whether to return to Cercei's bosom - or not etc etc.

[SeanF]

10 minutes ago, House Cambodia said:

I dislike theories that presume the endgame is one where the Forces of Good defeat the Forces of Evil. I think GRRM has done enough to show us he doesn't think that way (a la LOTR). R'hllor and The Great Other must remain beliefs in some people's minds, not objective realities. It's still an open question as to who is on each side anyway - full kudos to him for still screwing with us after all these years and pages.

Connected to that, I'm mistrustful of theories in which the endgame is some cosmic conflict in which humans are mere pawns - GRRM is serious about "the human heart in conflict with itself". Dany will have agency to choose whether or not to give up her 'god given' rights; Bran will have agency to choose whether to follow Bloodraven/the Weirwood Net or not, Undead Jon will be torn between his lingering humanity and what he's turned into, Arya whether to reject her assassin-conditioning, Jamie whether to return to Cercei's bosom - or not etc etc.

The Others are essentially the Norns from Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn, the primary non-human antagonists.  They have real grievances against humanity, but they are a real danger, and their society is pretty awful.

[Potsk]

On 3/15/2024 at 11:48 PM, The Vanguard said:

Like Illyrio being the grandson of Aerion Brightflame

I see your "Illyrio is Aerion's grandson" and raise you: Illyrio is the Tattered Prince's son, and the Tattered Prince is Prince Maegor, son of Aerion.

[House Cambodia]

35 minutes ago, SeanF said:

The Others are essentially the Norns from Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn, the primary non-human antagonists.  They have real grievances against humanity, but they are a real danger, and their society is pretty awful.

I'm unaware of the reference, but I'm saying that whilst they are a real and present existential danger to humanity, they won't be offed by a mere magic knife. It will take a series of brave, sacrificial, vital decisions by human agents who could choose otherwise, to defeat them (albeit with the aid of magic knives - and magic lizards).

[SeanF]

4 minutes ago, House Cambodia said:

I'm unaware of the reference, but I'm saying that whilst they are a real and present existential danger to humanity, they won't be offed by a mere magic knife. It will take a series of brave, sacrificial, vital decisions by human agents who could choose otherwise, to defeat them (albeit with the aid of magic knives - and magic lizards).

With that, I agree.