The Rhaegar + Lyanna = Jon thread, Part VIII

[Edward the Great]

What exactly are the Others going to do? They can't get through the Wall even if there were nobody guarding it. I think Stannis, at least for now, has foiled the Others plans when he defeated the wildling army. I think the Others wanted the wildlings to blow the horn. I think that was the plan.

[Lady Winter Rose]

What exactly are the Others going to do? They can't get through the Wall even if there were nobody guarding it. I think Stannis, at least for now, has foiled the Others plans when he defeated the wildling army. I think the Others wanted the wildlings to blow the horn. I think that was the plan.

It could be, but series aren't over. If Others aren't really a threat why bother to mention them. Martin will find some way to make Other really powerful Beyond-the-other-side-of-Wall. example: Wall could ruin apart.

[SFDanny]

Meh, indeed.

We have been down this road before, you and I, EB. Or as Illyrio says we “have dance this dance before.” How many times? Three? Four? Usually one of us writes something about the other’s post and it quickly escalates to you accusing me of something underhanded. I normally ask that you stop doing so, and when you don’t I stop responding to your posts. This time it was a little different in that I ignored your initial insults and only responded to book related topics. You didn’t get the hint and continued the insults. This time I’ve decided to respond, but let me first say why I don’t usually do so and why I’m doing so now.

First, posts devoted to personal attacks and questioning the motives of others are boring. I’d hazard to guess that most of us are here to discuss Martin’s works, not engage in silly flame wars trying to prove one’s supposed debating skills. I know that my interest is the former. I don’t mind an occasional sharp elbow in heated discussions, but I have little time for twisting and distorting other’s ideas in order to somehow make one’s self look superior. I think that is what you do, and do far too often. Not just with me, but with others as well. The “Syrio is alive” threads are littered with your disdainful and disrespectful posts towards others. One reason I avoid them like the plague.

So why respond now? Well at the very large risk of continuing a boring discussion, let me say you ticked me off. You succeeded. You won. You got under my skin. Not only by your direct insults to me, but with your continued insults towards me in posts responding to others. I find that classless, but, of course, that is just my opinion. It is unfortunate, EB, because the reason I haven’t just made you the second person to make my “ignore list” is because I have a great deal of respect for some of the work you have done - in particular your timeline. I have recommended it to others, and will continue to do so. I think it shows someone who has taken the time to do close readings of Martin’s work and has contributed something to this community. I don’t think that work excuses the way you treat others, however.

To the posts themselves, let me say I think you are both wrong in your theory, and engage in willful distortion of what I have said, and display the worst kind of hypocrisy and arrogance in the way you do so.

I am accused of making “assumptions.” I, of course, am totally and completely guilty of this accusation. That is, however, what we are all doing here, isn’t it? Taking the books we love and talking about them with others and saying “what if ...” and “if this is true, doesn’t that mean ...” or “I think the story is going in this direction.” I do this all the time. And so does everyone else on these forums, including you. It is a very large part of why we all spend time here. So, I’m at a loss to understand your objections to the use of assumptions.

Now, I know that is not all I’m accused of. I’m am also accused of putting out assumptions as if they are fact. The problem is almost all the time I label my assumptions with qualifiers, such as “I think” or “I believe” are meant to point to the reader that these are not facts, but my thoughts on the subject. This can be seen in my post you respond to by accusing me of all these sins mentioned above. In it I say things like:

“

I think

Lyanna believes Ned will protect Jon” and,

“

I think

she believes Ned will save Jon from Elia's children's fate” and,

“

I think

Lyanna thinks her son was in danger from her family” and,

“Her father,

I believe

, and her eldest brother rejected her choice of Rhaegar over Robert...”

Now contrast this to your own post in which you say this:

Because that's not what happened: Brandon rode to kill the kidnapper of his sister, Rickard rode to try to save his son and heir's life. That's all about protecting her/getting her back, not rejecting her

Notice there are no qualifiers here. You state this as if it is a fact, but the fact is that we know Robert says Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna, and we know Bran repeats this version, but we have nothing, that I know of, that says Brandon thought Lyanna was kidnapped. It is not a fact that he thought so, though you may be right that he did. I think there are things in the story that point to Brandon knowing Lyanna went willingly and she loved Rhaegar (his being at the tourney where a romance between Lyanna and Rhaegar likely started, Ned’s thoughts about Lyanna’s remarks about Robert’s wandering ways, Jaime's recounting of Brandon's challenge to Rhaegar before the gates of King's Landing - no mention in his version of returning Lyanna, Lyanna’s holding flowers that look to be the flowers given to her by Rhaegar at the tourney, etc. etc.) Of course, this is my opinion and my assumption, but your statement as fact is also your opinion and your assumption. Normally not a big deal as I assume most people mean to express their opinions here and don’t hold others to a standard in which they must continually identify their opinions.

It would have be nice to have a civil discussion about what are the strengths and weakness of both ideas, but your hypocrisy in ignoring my qualifiers marking my opinions as just that, and ignoring when you do the exact thing you accuse me of is truly galling. Galling and fundamentally dishonest. It is impossible to have a civil discussion with give and take on both sides without at least some level of respect towards each other. It is obvious you think me guilty of some nefarious conspiracy to dupe others into believing my opinions by disguising my opinions as fact. Nothing could be further from the truth and as a result I have to say this is the last time I will respond to one of your posts. It is not worth it. I’d rather exchange ideas with others who do so in a respectful way.

Lastly, let me end with this quote back on topic concerning your idea about the nature of Ned’s promise to Lyanna, and in general to respond to some of the ideas raised by others about what it might be. Ned says this:

“‘I will,’ Ned had promised her. That was his curse. Robert would swear undying love and forget them before evenfall, but Ned Stark kept his vows. He thought of the promises he’d made Lyanna as she lay dying, and the price he’d paid to keep them.” (AGoT 328) US hardback edition

bold emphasis added

Notice that Ned explicitly says in his thoughts to himself that he keeps the promises (plural by the way) that he made to Lyanna while she lay dying. So, it seems very likely he did not promise to put Jon on the throne in order to make a dying Lyanna feel better and then felt bad about breaking his promise by not doing so for the next fourteen years. Instead he says to himself he promised her something that he did for those fourteen years, and he paid a price in doing so.

[Edward the Great]

It could be, but series aren't over. If Others aren't really a threat why bother to mention them. Martin will find some way to make Other really powerful Beyond-the-other-side-of-Wall. example: Wall could ruin apart.

I was thinking about passages that mention the Others bred with some of the wildlings or northmen or something. Ew, that would be really evil.