Jump to content

The R+L=J thread, part XI


Angalin

Recommended Posts

But is there any precedent for bastards inheriting Dawn? I doubt it.

As zmflavius mentioned above, this actually works well with the "Song of Ice and Fire" title.

Sansa is a Stark, but does she really act like a Stark? No, she acts more like a Southerner, at least at the beginning of the story. This is shown symbolically when she loses her wolf. Similarly, Jon's father is a Targ (assuming R+L=J), yet he acts more like a Stark. I really don't see what the problem here is.

I find it interesting that you try to excuse away the existence of Bran's wolf simply because his name happens to be "Summer," especially since in one of your last posts you said it would be weird for Jon to be a Targ because then riding a dragon would downplay his wolf. Is the same not true for Bran?

Look, Bran has a direwolf like all the other Starks, and on top of that he can warg. How much more Stark/First Men can you get?

Also, where was his fascination with dragons established? This is an honest question, I can't remember when this occurred.

EXACTLY. Jon finding out his true parentage adds CONFLICT. It completely changes what he thought he knew about himself. And if he turns out to be a legitimate child of Rhaegar and not just a bastard, then his birthright will tempt him to leave the Night's Watch. This makes for a far more interesting storyline than if Wylla or Ashara are his mother.

I don't think those are the only two options. I think when Jon finds out that his heritage is radically different from what he thought it was, he'll realize that it ultimately doesn't matter. His parentage doesn't define him, his actions and attitudes do. I think he'll finally come to understand that at the end of the day he's a Stark where it counts, even if he doesn't have the name. Why would this sort of character growth be disappointing?

- We have no clue.

- We have to see if someone embodies both aspects. But to me, noone really does. It makes me think that fire and ice are more likely to be about different people working together, then one single person. It fits the ensemble cast better.

- The point about Jon is that he very much acts like a Stark. In contrast, he acts nothing like a Targaryen. So for him to act so much like one side of a polar relationship would make him having a father on the opposite side sort of hollow.

- The other thing about Bran is he is not just worging into his wolf. He has worged into Hodor as well. Whereas Jons relationship is solely with his wolff, Brans is branching out beyond that. So in that sense Summer is less of a symbol of Bran then Ghost is of Jon. The thing about the name Summer is just that it sharply contrasts the house's focus on winter. And I dont mean dragons literally, I mean magic in general. And it is established that Dragons are magical. So Summer to Bran is the first step on a journey, one that I could see ending with Dragons as a natural progression. With Jon there isnt a sense of progression, just a deep dependence on Ghost to sort of ground him.

- The conflict just rings hollow though. The principle things hes already dealt with thinking he was Ned's bastard. Hes already had to forsake avenging his "father" and already turned his back on any claims to being a Stark (despite it being offered to him on a platter by Stannis). To me R+L just changes some things about internal struggles hes already had with himself. It seems like the same old conflicts in new wrapping paper to me.

- I dont think Jon's parentage will have any effect on him directly at all. I think hes sort of gotten past that. So to me what the non-stark part of his heritage will do is open up doors that he didnt realize he were open but that he would be willing to walk through. Claiming Dawn is a door I can see him walking through, being a prince not one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- We have no clue.

Ok, but all the laws off inheritance suggest that he wouldn't inherit the sword, since bastards don't inherit anything else. Plus, even if he were a legitimate child of Ned and Ashara, he'd be a Stark and not a Dayne, and thus ineligible for the sword. So there's really no reason to think that he could inherit Dawn.

- The point about Jon is that he very much acts like a Stark. In contrast, he acts nothing like a Targaryen. So for him to act so much like one side of a polar relationship would make him having a father on the opposite side sort of hollow.

So your point is that Jon acts so much like a Stark, which would be strange if he were the child of two strong houses? In other words, why would one strong house so easily dominate another strong house?

Ok, fine, then why does Sansa act so much like a Southerner? She's the child of a strong house and a weak house, so by your logic she ought to act like a Stark, yet she doesn't. So how do you account for this?

All of this is assuming that your "two strong houses" theory of interpretation is even valid, which I don't think it is. The Targs have intermarried with other houses before, which sometimes resulted in decidedly non-Targish children. So there's precedent for this sort of thing.

- The other thing about Bran is he is not just worging into his wolf. He has worged into Hodor as well. Whereas Jons relationship is solely with his wolff, Brans is branching out beyond that. So in that sense Summer is less of a symbol of Bran then Ghost is of Jon.

Yes, and warging is a First Men trait. So if anything, Bran's ability to warg ties him more to the Stark heritage than Jon. How does Bran's warging tie him to the Targs?

The thing about the name Summer is just that it sharply contrasts the house's focus on winter.

None of which changes the fact that Bran has a wolf and is able to warg through it, both of which are decidedly Stark traits. You can't excuse this away because the wolf's name is "Summer."

And I dont mean dragons literally, I mean magic in general.

Wow. You're really backpedaling here. What you said was: "a sense of duty in him has not been well established (a fascination with dragons has)..." You said that Bran had a fascination with dragons, but you don't offer anything to support this. Saying "no, I mean magic in general" doesn't count.

And it is established that Dragons are magical. So Summer to Bran is the first step on a journey, one that I could see ending with Dragons as a natural progression. With Jon there isnt a sense of progression, just a deep dependence on Ghost to sort of ground him.

All of this is assuming that Jon will ride a dragon, which is not a given.

- The conflict just rings hollow though. The principle things hes already dealt with thinking he was Ned's bastard. Hes already had to forsake avenging his "father" and already turned his back on any claims to being a Stark (despite it being offered to him on a platter by Stannis). To me R+L just changes some things about internal struggles hes already had with himself. It seems like the same old conflicts in new wrapping paper to me.

Yes, Jon has already had internal struggles with himself, but that doesn't mean he's resolved them. He's been tempted to avenge his father, and later he was tempted to take Winterfell. R+L=J would add newer and bigger temptations. In other words, there would be a "sense of progression" here. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, but all the laws off inheritance suggest that he wouldn't inherit the sword, since bastards don't inherit anything else. Plus, even if he were a legitimate child of Ned and Ashara, he'd be a Stark and not a Dayne, and thus ineligible for the sword. So there's really no reason to think that he could inherit Dawn.

So your point is that Jon acts so much like a Stark, which would be strange if he were the child of two strong houses? In other words, why would one strong house so easily dominate another strong house?

Ok, fine, then why does Sansa act so much like a Southerner? She's the child of a strong house and a weak house, so by your logic she ought to act like a Stark, yet she doesn't. So how do you account for this?

All of this is assuming that your "two strong houses" theory of interpretation is even valid, which I don't think it is. The Targs have intermarried with other houses before, which sometimes resulted in decidedly non-Targish children. So there's precedent for this sort of thing.

Yes, and warging is a First Men trait. So if anything, Bran's ability to warg ties him more to the Stark heritage than Jon. How does Bran's warging tie him to the Targs?

None of which changes the fact that Bran has a wolf and is able to warg through it, both of which are decidedly Stark traits. You can't excuse this away because the wolf's name is "Summer."

Wow. You're really backpedaling here. What you said was: "a sense of duty in him has not been well established (a fascination with dragons has)..." You said that Bran had a fascination with dragons, but you don't offer anything to support this. Saying "no, I mean magic in general" doesn't count.

All of this is assuming that Jon will ride a dragon, which is not a given.

Yes, Jon has already had internal struggles with himself, but that doesn't mean he's resolved them. He's been tempted to avenge his father, and later he was tempted to take Winterfell. R+L=J would add newer and bigger temptations. In other words, there would be a "sense of progression" here. :)

- We dont know the exact rules for becoming sword of the morning, just that it seems internal to house dayne. It seems to me not to be an inherited title though, as it seems to have gone unclaimed for some time.

- Ok, with the strong houses thing, I think you are taking this too literally. This is not because Jon is a Stark he cant be a Targ by some weird genetics. Its just a matter of the things that are associated with him so heavily weight toward one of two houses that are polar opposites. If hes so heavily weighted toward one side, the other side is going to seem tacked on. For two houses that arent so opposed, a character can be a representative of both. But that doesn't mean a character has to represent their house or cant represent another, just that when you tie a character so heavily to one house, linking him to another that he doesnt fit in with in any way just falls flat.

- Worging is a northern thing it seems, but the word and most of the actors are actually wildlings. Its magic, not really particular to a house. We dont know if its strictly a first man thing, we dont know how the original Targs controlled their dragons.

- On Bran and dragons... Hmm, didnt mean to backpedal, just conflated two thoughts in my head. My bad. Not backpedaling, mistated myself.

- I know Its not a given Jon will ride a dragon, my point is its one possible path for Targ heritage to assert itself. For a character like Bran it would make sense. For Jon, it wouldnt as much.

- Maybe, but I dont see how that knowledge would add something to things. Id find it more repetitious then anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- We dont know the exact rules for becoming sword of the morning, just that it seems internal to house dayne. It seems to me not to be an inherited title though, as it seems to have gone unclaimed for some time.

If it's internal to House Dayne, then Jon wouldn't be given the sword because he's not a Dayne. You haven't really addressed this fact.

- Ok, with the strong houses thing, I think you are taking this too literally. This is not because Jon is a Stark he cant be a Targ by some weird genetics. Its just a matter of the things that are associated with him so heavily weight toward one of two houses that are polar opposites. If hes so heavily weighted toward one side, the other side is going to seem tacked on. For two houses that arent so opposed, a character can be a representative of both. But that doesn't mean a character has to represent their house or cant represent another, just that when you tie a character so heavily to one house, linking him to another that he doesnt fit in with in any way just falls flat.

I am perhaps taking things too literally, but only because I'm a bit...off put, let's say, by this line of argument. But let me see if I understand what you're saying. You think that R+L=J won't be satisfying because Jon's Targ heritage will feel "tacked on", that it won't really add anything to his character. Do I have that right?

This may come down to a difference of preference, but I disagree on that point. As I've said before, I think that if/when Jon finds out about his heritage, he'll realize that all along it hasn't really been his heritage that has mattered, it's the way he acts, the way he's been raised. I think that will contribute to his character growth. Would this really not be satisfying for you?

- Worging is a northern thing it seems, but the word and most of the actors are actually wildlings. Its magic, not really particular to a house. We dont know if its strictly a first man thing, we dont know how the original Targs controlled their dragons.

It very likely is a First Men thing, because the First Men worshiped the Old Gods of nature, and warging involves taking control of nature's creatures. And Bran, much like the children of the forest, is able to see through weirwoods. This ties him much more to the North than even Jon. So I don't really understand why it would be "less jarring" for Bran to be revealed a Targ.

- On Bran and dragons... Hmm, didnt mean to backpedal, just conflated two thoughts in my head. My bad. Not backpedaling, mistated myself.

Well, I'm not quite sure how your mind could have gone from "he has magical abilities" to "he's fascinated by dragons," but I'll take you at your word that it was a misstatement.

That said, I'd like to add that it's not necessarily the case that dragons are tied to all magic, or that they even cause magic at all. It's possible that there are different systems of magic, such as blood magic and First Men magic and fire magic, and some of this magic still existed even before dragons were revived. And to the extent that the revival of dragons coincided with the resurgence of magic, well, correlation doesn't equal causation. It's similar to the question of whether or not the winter brings the Others or the Others bring the winter: do dragons bring magic or does magic bring dragons?

- I know Its not a given Jon will ride a dragon, my point is its one possible path for Targ heritage to assert itself. For a character like Bran it would make sense. For Jon, it wouldnt as much.

I don't really see why it wouldn't make sense for Jon, though. He's a warg, just like Bran and Arya. Yes, he hasn't warged anything other than Ghost yet, but that doesn't mean he won't be able to warg other things in the future.

And anyway, there are other ways his Targ heritage could figure into the plot. It could help his character growth, as I've highlighted before, or it could make him a target of Melisandre, who has spent most of the last two novels looking for kings to burn. Both of those potential plot avenues satisfy me. Do they not satisfy you?

- Maybe, but I dont see how that knowledge would add something to things. Id find it more repetitious then anything.

You call it repetitious, I call it thematic consistency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few of my own thoughts, which when regarding aSoIaF are more often wrong than right.

I'd much rather Jon be Ned's son, as Ned was a better fellow Rhaegar

The only person who ever really said Rhaegar was anything other than brilliant, honorable, and popular, is Robert. Granted he has reason to feel that way, but there really isn't any evidence that Rhaegar was not a good person. I guess there is the infidelity, but if he felt it was necessary to save Westeros, then that's that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it's internal to House Dayne, then Jon wouldn't be given the sword because he's not a Dayne. You haven't really addressed this fact.

If we are talking about N+A= J, then this may be good enough. We dont know, its entirely possible the Dayne family has a soft spot for Ashara's little boy, even if he is a bastard.

I am perhaps taking things too literally, but only because I'm a bit...off put, let's say, by this line of argument. But let me see if I understand what you're saying. You think that R+L=J won't be satisfying because Jon's Targ heritage will feel "tacked on", that it won't really add anything to his character. Do I have that right?

This may come down to a difference of preference, but I disagree on that point. As I've said before, I think that if/when Jon finds out about his heritage, he'll realize that all along it hasn't really been his heritage that has mattered, it's the way he acts, the way he's been raised. I think that will contribute to his character growth. Would this really not be satisfying for you?

But couldnt his mother being anybody really cause that same sort of feeling? And if it has no plot relevance, beyond an epiphany, why hide it for 4 books.

If R+L=J were revealed halfway through book two, fine, lets move on. But waiting as long as he has I want a meaty payoff. You build it up for so long, it better deliver.

It very likely is a First Men thing, because the First Men worshiped the Old Gods of nature, and warging involves taking control of nature's creatures. And Bran, much like the children of the forest, is able to see through weirwoods. This ties him much more to the North than even Jon. So I don't really understand why it would be "less jarring" for Bran to be revealed a Targ.

Possibly. We dont know, its all been kept sort of mysterious. My point isnt that it will happen, just that for Bran there is more leeway to work in Targaryen heritage without having to diminish anything hes been up to this point.

And what makes it less jarring from Bran is that hes already branching out from Summer, and its deliberate. For Jon, its instinctual, and its tied to Ghost. So I can see Bran looking at a rampaging dragon and going "Ok, im going to warg into it and stop it." But Jon? I cant see him trying to warg into Ghost intentional, let alone something that is not ghost.

Well, I'm not quite sure how your mind could have gone from "he has magical abilities" to "he's fascinated by dragons," but I'll take you at your word that it was a misstatement.

That said, I'd like to add that it's not necessarily the case that dragons are tied to all magic, or that they even cause magic at all. It's possible that there are different systems of magic, such as blood magic and First Men magic and fire magic, and some of this magic still existed even before dragons were revived. And to the extent that the revival of dragons coincided with the resurgence of magic, well, correlation doesn't equal causation. It's similar to the question of whether or not the winter brings the Others or the Others bring the winter: do dragons bring magic or does magic bring dragons?

Bran is fascinated by stories of the green men, of the others, of really anything to do with magic. Maybe its an affintity for magical things in a specific ethos, but I think its a little broader then that. But this is getting way off topic. I just see a natural progression and expansion in Bran where I can see warging into a Dragon as a logical endpoint, which would be dovetail nicely with him being a Targ .Hes not obviously, again, this is just an example of how a natural thematic progression would look. I dont see signs of that in Jon, at all.

I don't really see why it wouldn't make sense for Jon, though. He's a warg, just like Bran and Arya. Yes, he hasn't warged anything other than Ghost yet, but that doesn't mean he won't be able to warg other things in the future.

I think we are at the point of the novels that if Warging into all manner of beasts was in his future, he should have at least tried to once. It also strikes me that this is a an ability that while other stark children have shown it, its really most important to Bran's story. I think if there is anything significant to be done in this regard it has to be Bran, who Martin crippled in the first book.

And anyway, there are other ways his Targ heritage could figure into the plot. It could help his character growth, as I've highlighted before, or it could make him a target of Melisandre, who has spent most of the last two novels looking for kings to burn. Both of those potential plot avenues satisfy me. Do they not satisfy you?

The character growth angle is redundant to me. I dont see it adding anything that wasnt already there with being the bastard son of a great house. Now hes the bastard son of a prince... um, whats changed? The house? That hes technically not a bastard, but not that anyone will believe that because there is no public record of it.

And it wouldnt take much to be a target of Melisandre. Simply defying Melisandre seems to be enough for that. And hes already given Stannis enough grounds to make him a target for Stannis. It seems an awfully big secret to lay out there just to create a plot point that is pretty easy to do in a number of other ways.

Its not the L part that is difficult, its the R. Why should who Jon's father is matter in this scenario. What is compelling about him being the son of Rhaegar? What if his father was Jaime Lannister, would that be any different Rhaegar? What if he was a mime from oldtown? It just seems to me that its hard to see how R+L to be true without one of the parents dwarfing the other in importance.

You call it repetitious, I call it thematic consistency.

I find it boring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we are talking about N+A= J, then this may be good enough. We dont know, its entirely possible the Dayne family has a soft spot for Ashara's little boy, even if he is a bastard.

Yes, we're assuming N+A=J here. And I'm sorry, but "we don't know" is a really weak argument. Nothing in the books suggests that bastards can receive Dawn. Bastards are entitled to nothing in this world, that's part of what makes Jon feel like he has nowhere to go other than the Wall. If a bastard could be entitled to Dawn, then that contradicts everything we've been told about bastards' lot in life. And even if Jon weren't a bastard, he wouldn't be a Dayne. Dawn is supposed to remain in the Dayne family, there's absolutely no precedent for otherwise. Now add in the fact that there is already a Lord of Starfall who is presumably set to inherit Dawn, and the prospect of Jon getting the sword becomes slim. If Jon did get the sword, it would come out of nowhere and wouldn't make sense in the context of what we've been told so far. Honestly, it really just seems to me that this is your pet theory, and you're trying to manipulate the evidence to fit it, even when it outright contradicts it.

But couldnt his mother being anybody really cause that same sort of feeling?

No, because under R+L=J he wouldn't just be finding out who his mother is, he'd be finding out that the man he thought was his father wasn't. If all Jon did was find out his mother was Ashara or Wylla, his only reaction would be, "Well, I guess that answers that." But if he finds out that he never really knew who either of his parents were, then it would seriously throw his identity into question. That sort of plot turn would be far more compelling than any other theory of Jon's parentage.

And if it has no plot relevance, beyond an epiphany, why hide it for 4 books.

If R+L=J were revealed halfway through book two, fine, lets move on. But waiting as long as he has I want a meaty payoff. You build it up for so long, it better deliver.

By the same token, why build it up for so long if it turned out that Jon's mother was exactly who others said she was? What's the point of that? Martin has been building this up for so long, the answer must be momentous; and what would be more momentous than finding out he's the son of the last dragon?

And what makes it less jarring from Bran is that hes already branching out from Summer, and its deliberate. For Jon, its instinctual, and its tied to Ghost. So I can see Bran looking at a rampaging dragon and going "Ok, im going to warg into it and stop it." But Jon? I cant see him trying to warg into Ghost intentional, let alone something that is not ghost.

Why would George give Jon the ability to warg if he wasn't some day going to use it?

I just see a natural progression and expansion in Bran where I can see warging into a Dragon as a logical endpoint, which would be dovetail nicely with him being a Targ .Hes not obviously, again, this is just an example of how a natural thematic progression would look. I dont see signs of that in Jon, at all.

But as I've said before, there would also be a natural thematic progression for Jon. Over the course of three books he's dealt with escalating temptations, from revenge to love to the prospect of receiving Winterfell. In the future, we can expect him to be tempted by Robb's legitimizing him as King in the North, and if R+L=J is true, he may be tempted by the Iron Throne. All of this is consistent thematic characterization, and not jarring as you've claimed. Yet when I point this out, you shift gears and claim it would be "boring." So either the theory is inconsistent and therefore jarring, or it is consistent and therefore boring. It really does seem like this theory can't do anything to win you over.

I think we are at the point of the novels that if Warging into all manner of beasts was in his future, he should have at least tried to once.

Jon hasn't had greenseers to help him along with his abilities. He would be even more of a Gary Stu-ish character if he naturally developed Bran's abilities simply by virtue of his awesomeness.

The character growth angle is redundant to me. I dont see it adding anything that wasnt already there with being the bastard son of a great house. Now hes the bastard son of a prince... um, whats changed? The house? That hes technically not a bastard, but not that anyone will believe that because there is no public record of it.

As I said above, what would change under R+L=J is that he'd find out that none of his parents were who he thought they were. That's far more interesting than finding out his mother is who plenty of other people thought she was.

And it wouldnt take much to be a target of Melisandre. Simply defying Melisandre seems to be enough for that.

Yes, but his having kingsblood would make him Melisandre's number one target, rather than an insubordinate nuisance.

It just seems to me that its hard to see how R+L to be true without one of the parents dwarfing the other in importance.

But that's just it: R+L=J would make Jon realize it doesn't matter who his parents are, it matters how he acts. He's a Stark in every way it counts.

ETA--The Daynes are an ancient house, older than the Starks IIRC, perhaps even older than the Targaryens. If Jon's mother is Ashara, then why wouldn't it also be jarring that he seems not to have any Dayne features or characteristics? What exactly would be more consistent about that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, first post on my new name........I've been away a few years waiting for ADwD to come out.

R+L=J is 100% in my book, figured it out my first read through the series. (Had to lead my dad by the nose until he figured it out)

Here are my thoughts on the above pages discussion:

1) With all the evidence it is hard to not think R+L=J, aside from some who will not believe until GRRM puts it on the page.

a) Neds thoughts of Jon are never as his son in his internal monologue. His thoughts keep reverting to his promise to his sister.....what other promise would he still think of so intently?

B) He does not think poorly of Rhaegar in AGoT.......one would think that if the guy raped your sister you would not think too much of him.

c) Lyanna's bed of blood is a good indicator she gave birth, plus the flowers are (most likely blue roses).

d) Danny's vision of a blue rose blooming in a wall of ice........seeing as those are Lyanna's favorite flowers...

e) Ned's letter to Jon.....that may or may not have even been written (what else would have been so important that he write to Jon and not any of his other children)

f) Jons eyes..........could almost be a dark purple no?

g) Ned was an honst guy, if Jon's mother was a normal person Willa or someone he would have most likely not hidden it. but for him to forbit Cat ever asking who Jon's mother was......very extreme.

2) Jon's herritage of Ice and Fire

People seem to think that he does not act like a Targ, or that it does not fit. Well I have a different take on that.

The blood of the fisrt men runs in his veins strongly......but we have recently seen his temper. Bashing Iron Emmet into a pulp in a rage could be seen as waking the dragon no? Now Jon is not a huge guy but he 1 hands Thorne by the throat up off the ground.....that takes some serious rage. But he also retains he Northern blood qualities as well.

He is a fusion of Ice and Fire, and is his own person. Even if he found out his true parents I think the main thing he would get is peace of mind. Not wondering why Ned never told him who his mother was etc.

I doubt he will end up on a dragon, but knowing what he came from may come into play if Danny ever learns of it.

3) Robbs letter........Robb's letter that allegedly names Jon his heir.

Now if that letter makes it to Jon with Howland Reed, and Maege, what do you think happens then?

Jon is legitimised by Robb's decree.........I wonder how Stannis reacts?

I highly doubt Jon would abandon the wall, but Stannis and Mel may force the issue and try to kill him.

I think that letter will make Jon's life 100% harder, not only the temptation but the people who would want him dead as well.

He would be a threat to the Boltons, Stannis etc.

My bet is Rikkon ends up with Winterfell at the end as lord. I hope Jon lives, but I doubt the wall will be standing at the end of the series for him to defend. Maybe he will actually end up happy? I am keeping my fingers crossed but this is GRRM after all..........

Wow, and I forgot to mention a big one......if R+L does not = J...Then why in the world were the Kingsguard at the ToJ????????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know that Aemon said the sword was not the fabled blade that AA would carry but still, I don't think that rules out that the blade could still undergo the transformation necessary to make it Lightbringer. I also find it interesting that the name of the sword is the same name that Lucifer was known as and is suppose to be wielded by AA, a messianic figure, so yes, I'm aware that the sword is a fake in its current state but to rule out that it could not undergo another transformation seems a bit premature.

Going on with your theory, however, I'd say that Oathkeeper and it's sister sword are more likely candidates for being Lightbringer via their Valyrian steel compositions since they were forged from Ice, than Longclaw. I just venture to assume that Ice was an elder sword since it was held by the Starks and not the Mormonts, a vassal house.

Longclaw will end up back in the hands of its rightful owner, Jorah?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well he is with the BWB so if they survive he could really end up anywhere as a smith.

If he accepts her or not is a very good question.

however he did seem more smitten with her as a murdering flea-bitten boy then as a Nobel, he might even like the new Arya more!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Errrrr, thats just not right. They are still cousins.

If Jon gets another love interest my money is on Asha or Danny.

Uhhh...so Jon getting with Arya is icky because they are cousins, but Jon getting with Dany isn't icky even thought she's his aunt? (Not that I want Jon to get with either of them...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uhhh...so Jon getting with Arya is icky because they are cousins, but Jon getting with Dany isn't icky even thought she's his aunt? (Not that I want Jon to get with either of them...)

Whats Robert's bastards daughters name? Mia or something, if all the houses have to fit together at the end for peace I'm sure this would be a viable option for Jon...(not that I agree)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well at least Danny is a full blood Targ, and Jon did not grow up with her as a sister.

I am not saying him being with Arya is any less odd, but I think there is more of a possibility of romance between him and a hot female who is his own age.....than who he grew up with and thinks of like a sister.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uhhh...so Jon getting with Arya is icky because they are cousins, but Jon getting with Dany isn't icky even thought she's his aunt? (Not that I want Jon to get with either of them...)

Right, because Arya isn't a Lannister or Targaryen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...