Jump to content

R+L=J v.21


Angalin

Recommended Posts

It was an arranged marriage and he barely knew her at the time. It protected her and the rest of the children with plausible deniability. It protected Jon because if Cat started treating Jon with loving care than it would cause people to look closer at the circumstances surrounding Jon's birth.

I can see not telling Cat at first, but not after 5 years? 10 years? Seems farfetched to me. Cat wouldn't have to smother Jon in kisses, but surely it would be better to raise a kid in a household in which his step-mother didn't hate him. Again, this doesn't disprove the theory. I just think that it makes a story based on the theory weaker than it would be if Jon were simply Ned's bastard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The plausible deniability angle is only one of three non-exclusive possibilities. My favorite is the honor-based angle (i.e., his promise to Lyanna), because that squares quite nicely with Ned's character and his memories.

An the Dany thing - we don't know if Drogon's fire really hit her, or only her hair (ceratine burns quite easily). So, unless it's clearly stated that she survives a fire that sets her clothes aflame, I'll withhold judgement on whether Dany is fireproof; when forced to bet, I'd go for her being vulnerable by fire, though.

Oh, and Aegon is probably fake. Plus, we don't even know if Jon ever discovers his parentage, or if he becomes king before knowing - i.e., the secret heir to the throne trope might easily be subverte by Martin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The plausible deniability angle is only one of three non-exclusive possibilities. My favorite is the honor-based angle (i.e., his promise to Lyanna), because that squares quite nicely with Ned's character and his memories.

If it is established that the theory is true and that Ned expressly promised never to tell anyone (even Cat) the truth, and it is established that Ned in fact never told the truth to Cat during a 15 year period even though the lie made everyone miserable, then it weakens the character IMO. It turns Ned into a caricature, as it removes his only blemish (i.e. fathering a bastard child while married). It also establishes that Ned's concept of honor is extremely simplistic, marking him as someone who follows the letter of the law without understanding the spirit of it. Would Lyanna want Jon to have a miserable childhood because Ned didn't have the sense to tell his trustworthy wife? It doesn't make sense.

I hope the theory isn't true. The other two major fantasy series of the 1990s / 2000s featured heroes who were revealed to have different parents than originally assumed (Rand al'Thor in The Wheel of Time and Richard Cypher in the Sword of Truth series). Is GRRM really taking the series down that path? I hope not. ASoIaF is great because it's not the typical fantasy epic. Making Jon the secret son of Rhaegar and Lyanna and the hero of the story would be a big step towards making ASoIaF generic. If the theory is true, then I hope Jon is truly dead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see not telling Cat at first, but not after 5 years? 10 years? Seems farfetched to me. Cat wouldn't have to smother Jon in kisses, but surely it would be better to raise a kid in a household in which his step-mother didn't hate him. Again, this doesn't disprove the theory. I just think that it makes a story based on the theory weaker than it would be if Jon were simply Ned's bastard.

Cat was a traditional noblewoman all about the honor of her house. If she was seen as being anything other than distant or cold to Ned's bastard, it might have raised red flags among some of the Stark's less honorable bannermen (ilke say the Boltons or Karstarks). It's sort of easy to put two-and-two together after that. What's keeping everyone from investigating further is Ned's honor and Cat's actions toward Jon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cat was a traditional noblewoman all about the honor of her house. If she was seen as being anything other than distant or cold to Ned's bastard, it might have raised red flags among some of the Stark's less honorable bannermen (ilke say the Boltons or Karstarks). It's sort of easy to put two-and-two together after that. What's keeping everyone from investigating further is Ned's honor and Cat's actions toward Jon.

She could be colder around Jon when other nobles were around, then. From Ned's perspective, it would make more sense (and be more humane) to have Cat distance herself from John in public but be semi-caring to him in private than it would be to keep her in the dark and have her hate (and mistreat) Jon and resent Ned.

GRRM can write a story in which Ned chooses to keep the truth from Cat, but it takes mental gymnastics to keep it plausible and in the end isn't very satisfying (to me at least). IMO, even taking out my dislike of the extremely cliche aspect of the secret parentage of the hero, the better story is the simpler story: Ned's not perfect, he fathered a bastard. However, his honor requires him to take care of the child rather than abandoning him. This choice puts him at odds with his wife, who sees the bastard as a slight on her honor. This is a believable story and fits within a reasonable understanding of Ned's personailty without making him a 2-dimensional perfect (or stupid) character.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it is established that the theory is true and that Ned expressly promised never to tell anyone (even Cat) the truth, and it is established that Ned in fact never told the truth to Cat during a 15 year period even though the lie made everyone miserable, then it weakens the character IMO. It turns Ned into a caricature, as it removes his only blemish (i.e. fathering a bastard child while married). It also establishes that Ned's concept of honor is extremely simplistic, marking him as someone who follows the letter of the law without understanding the spirit of it. Would Lyanna want Jon to have a miserable childhood because Ned didn't have the sense to tell his trustworthy wife? It doesn't make sense.
  1. Just because a fourteen year old boy with a huge emo streak (similar to a certain Dragon Prince) thinks he has an awful miserable childhood doesn't make it so. Jon had a better life than 99.9% of Westros. He grew up in safety and comfort and was given the same education as Robb was. If Ned didn't go south, Jon would probably end up as a trusted advisor to Robb when he inherited. In fact, I'd argue that one of the main arcs that Jon goes through in ASOIAF is learning that many people have a much more difficult life than he did and that he's not the only one with problems.
  2. I wouldn't consider the guy who went south to King's Landing and got himself executed a caricature without flaws. It isn't the Seven Deadly Sins, but naivety and unbending honor turn out to be tragic flaws that cost Ned his life. One could even argue that Ned not trusting his wife and telling her about Jon is a flaw.

I hope the theory isn't true. The other two major fantasy series of the 1990s / 2000s featured heroes who were revealed to have different parents than originally assumed (Rand al'Thor in The Wheel of Time and Richard Cypher in the Sword of Truth series). Is GRRM really taking the series down that path? I hope not. ASoIaF is great because it's not the typical fantasy epic. Making Jon the secret son of Rhaegar and Lyanna and the hero of the story would be a big step towards making ASoIaF generic. If the theory is true, then I hope Jon is truly dead.
  1. The bastard boy who saves the world is as much a standard fantasy trope as the hidden heir. Either way Jon Snow represents a classic character in fiction. It just seems that the hidden heir is more likely. The only way that it would be different is if Martin just decided to kill Jon off 'cause.. which would be bad writing, not groundbreaking and shocking. (it would remind me of a college freshman's attempt to channel Sartre more than a series written by an experienced screenwriter).
  2. It's not an awful thing to follow a standard literature trope. The reason why they've been around for quite awhile (and the hidden heir trope most definitely wasn't invented in the 1990s) is that it makes for the framework of a great story. The key is to put a twist on it. What I see Martin doing with Rhaegar, Lyanna, and their son is injecting realpolitik into the classic frameworks of star-crossed lovers and the hidden heir. I view Rhaegar and Lyanna, especially Rhaegar, as two selfish people who disregarded the consequences to their actions and ended up getting many innocent people killed and ruining the lives of many others. Ned has to live a lie and endanger his family because of Rhaegar and Lyanna's actions. I also doubt that the revelation of Jon as a Targaryen is going to end well for Jon. Just because R+L=J, doesn't mean that Jon becomes a wise and just king and lives happily ever after with Dany.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She could be colder around Jon when other nobles were around, then. From Ned's perspective, it would make more sense (and be more humane) to have Cat distance herself from John in public but be semi-caring to him in private than it would be to keep her in the dark and have her hate (and mistreat) Jon and resent Ned.

Ned being that publicly accepting of Jon is considered unusual by Westerosi standards. Cat's obvious hatred for the boy helps make the situation more plausible to others. If she knew, her options would be to treat him better and have her entire household notice the change, or knowingly treat her nephew like shit to keep up appearances. She couldn't ever turn it off because even Hodor would notice that kind of reversal. Jon going to the Watch and being separated from daily contact with her followed by the death of Robert would possibly be enough to make it safe but we never get to find out.

GRRM can write a story in which Ned chooses to keep the truth from Cat, but it takes mental gymnastics to keep it plausible and in the end isn't very satisfying (to me at least). IMO, even taking out my dislike of the extremely cliche aspect of the secret parentage of the hero, the better story is the simpler story: Ned's not perfect, he fathered a bastard. However, his honor requires him to take care of the child rather than abandoning him. This choice puts him at odds with his wife, who sees the bastard as a slight on her honor. This is a believable story and fits within a reasonable understanding of Ned's personailty without making him a 2-dimensional perfect (or stupid) character.

It's well established that the one chink in Ned's honor is that he's wiling to publicly renounce it when his family is threatened. It is not remotely unreasonable to think that a man who would falsely confess treason to protect his daughters would also falsely admit to adultery to protect his nephew.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it is established that the theory is true and that Ned expressly promised never to tell anyone (even Cat) the truth, and it is established that Ned in fact never told the truth to Cat during a 15 year period even though the lie made everyone miserable, then it weakens the character IMO. It turns Ned into a caricature, as it removes his only blemish (i.e. fathering a bastard child while married). It also establishes that Ned's concept of honor is extremely simplistic, marking him as someone who follows the letter of the law without understanding the spirit of it. Would Lyanna want Jon to have a miserable childhood because Ned didn't have the sense to tell his trustworthy wife? It doesn't make sense.

A few points:

1) I wouldn't say that if R+L=J is true then Ned has no blemishes on his honor. Certainly he doesn't think so, given that he is haunted by his promises to Lyanna, and the price he paid to keep them. The fact is, by harboring Jon as his own son, he is lying to his king and committing treason. You and I might think of this as being no big deal, but for Ned it is a serious violation of his honor code, and all so that he can protect the child of the sister he loved. IMO, this makes his character more interesting and complicated, not less so.

2) I don't know why everyone assumes that if Cat found out the truth she'd be more inclined to treat Jon kindly. I think the opposite is true. The reason she dislikes Jon now is that she worries that he or his descendants could one day challenge her own children's claim to Winterfell. In other words, as Ned's bastard Jon represents a threat, even if only a vague and hypothetical one. However, if she found out Jon was really Rhaegar's son, then all of a sudden Jon would come to represent a far more direct threat to her family. After all, there is always a danger that Robert could find out the truth, at which point her life and the lives of her children would be in jeopardy. Therefore, I think that if she ever found out about Jon's true parentage, she would be even more incensed and indignant at Ned for committing treason and harboring the child of a rival dynasty, and might even go so far as to demand he be sent elsewhere. And who knows, she might even decide to inform Robert of the truth in exchange for her family's safety. That is certainly a risk that Ned could never take, which is partly why I think he doesn't tell her who Jon really is.

3) Finally, there is a quote from AGOT that, IMO, objectively proves that Ned would not tell Catelyn about Jon's true parentage:

"Some secrets are safer kept hidden. Some secrets are too dangerous to share, even with those you love and trust."

This quote comes directly from Ned's own thoughts. I think we can all agree that if Jon is really Rhaegar's son, then this would qualify as a very, very dangerous secret. It would therefore qualify as a secret that Ned would tell to no one, no matter how much he might love them or trust them. So at this point, I think it's time that we dispensed with this particular objection to R+L=J.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:agree:

The plausible deniability angle might work, but it's pretty weak explanation IMO. Given what we know about the characters, It's hard to accept that Ned would allow a situation in which both Cat and Jon are miserable for decades. Cat obviously hated and resented Jon, and that hatred and resentment affected Ned & Cat's marriage. Ned cared for Cat and Jon both. I don't see why he would allow it to go on when he could end it with a simple explanation to Cat.

The walls have ears. I believe that's the main reason why he never told her - someone else could have listened. It was risking too much.

What I do wonder is if Benjen knew (or knows). Not necessarily from Ned telling him, but it's very likely he was Lyanna's dearest brother - couldn't he have seen something of her in Jon?

My favorite thing about ASoIaF is that it avoids the standard fantasy cliche of the chosen young hero who rises up to save the world. It's why I enjoyed the Red Wedding so much- Robb was too much of a perfect wunderkind hero for my taste. ASoIaF is much more political and interesting than the typical fantasy series. (my favorite scenes in the entire series are those in ACoK in which Tyrion, Littlefinger, and Varys are plotting with and against each other). Having Jon be this secret Targaryen savior (a "Dragon Reborn" if you will) goes against the spirit of the earlier books. I liked the Rhaegar and Lyanna story as background establishing character motivation- it helped give Ned and Robert depth. However, I hope that Rhaegar and Lyanna stay that way- part of the past, not part of the active story. It's bad enough that all of the sudden Prince Aegon is back. There are enough claimaints for the throne as it is- why do we need to resurrect / reveal more claimants?

I love that Martin breaks so many clichés, but he can't break them all, it wouldn't be plausible. There are certain rules that must be obeyed for something to be considered a great story - otherwise it's just post-modern rubbish trying to hide the fact that its contents are void of any value through a pseudo-deconstructive mania.

If it is established that the theory is true and that Ned expressly promised never to tell anyone (even Cat) the truth, and it is established that Ned in fact never told the truth to Cat during a 15 year period even though the lie made everyone miserable, then it weakens the character IMO. It turns Ned into a caricature, as it removes his only blemish (i.e. fathering a bastard child while married). It also establishes that Ned's concept of honor is extremely simplistic, marking him as someone who follows the letter of the law without understanding the spirit of it. Would Lyanna want Jon to have a miserable childhood because Ned didn't have the sense to tell his trustworthy wife? It doesn't make sense.

You seriously think his making everyone believe Jon was his son was the honorable thing? Not entirely. It was honorable when we consider the promise to his sister, but that's all. He betrayed his king and best friend by hiding the rightful heir to the throne, he betrayed his wife by making her believe in it, he betrayed Jon by never telling him the truth about who he is. I'd say Ned is anything but a caricature.

  1. The bastard boy who saves the world is as much a standard fantasy trope as the hidden heir. Either way Jon Snow represents a classic character in fiction. It just seems that the hidden heir is more likely. The only way that it would be different is if Martin just decided to kill Jon off 'cause.. which would be bad writing, not groundbreaking and shocking. (it would remind me of a college freshman's attempt to channel Sartre more than a series written by an experienced screenwriter).
  2. It's not an awful thing to follow a standard literature trope. The reason why they've been around for quite awhile (and the hidden heir trope most definitely wasn't invented in the 1990s) is that it makes for the framework of a great story. The key is to put a twist on it. What I see Martin doing with Rhaegar, Lyanna, and their son is injecting realpolitik into the classic frameworks of star-crossed lovers and the hidden heir. I view Rhaegar and Lyanna, especially Rhaegar, as two selfish people who disregarded the consequences to their actions and ended up getting many innocent people killed and ruining the lives of many others. Ned has to live a lie and endanger his family because of Rhaegar and Lyanna's actions. I also doubt that the revelation of Jon as a Targaryen is going to end well for Jon. Just because R+L=J, doesn't mean that Jon becomes a wise and just king and lives happily ever after with Dany.

:agree:

Not to mention that becoming king is hardly one of Jon's dreams, so even if he is king in the end, he'll be just as miserable as we can expect anyone to be in ASoIaF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2) I don't know why everyone assumes that if Cat found out the truth she'd be more inclined to treat Jon kindly. I think the opposite is true. The reason she dislikes Jon now is that she worries that he or his descendants could one day challenge her own children's claim to Winterfell. In other words, as Ned's bastard Jon represents a threat, even if only a vague and hypothetical one. However, if she found out Jon was really Rhaegar's son, then all of a sudden Jon would come to represent a far more direct threat to her family. After all, there is always a danger that Robert could find out the truth, at which point her life and the lives of her children would be in jeopardy. Therefore, I think that if she ever found out about Jon's true parentage, she would be even more incensed and indignant at Ned for committing treason and harboring the child of a rival dynasty, and might even go so far as to demand he be sent elsewhere. And who knows, she might even decide to inform Robert of the truth in exchange for her family's safety. That is certainly a risk that Ned could never take, which is partly why I think he doesn't tell her who Jon really is.

I agree very strongly with that. She would have used the information instead of keeping it a secret. Ned was right in not telling her because it kept Jon alive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to mention that becoming king is hardly one of Jon's dreams, so even if he is king in the end, he'll be just as miserable as we can expect anyone to be in ASoIaF.

Jon would never accept the crown anyway. Stannis offered him Winterfell, which he actually wanted, and he refused. Why would he accept a kingdom he doesn't want?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:agree:

The walls have ears. I believe that's the main reason why he never told her - someone else could have listened. It was risking too much.

What I do wonder is if Benjen knew (or knows). Not necessarily from Ned telling him, but it's very likely he was Lyanna's dearest brother - couldn't he have seen something of her in Jon?

I love that Martin breaks so many clichés, but he can't break them all, it wouldn't be plausible. There are certain rules that must be obeyed for something to be considered a great story - otherwise it's just post-modern rubbish trying to hide the fact that its contents are void of any value through a pseudo-deconstructive mania.

You seriously think his making everyone believe Jon was his son was the honorable thing? Not entirely. It was honorable when we consider the promise to his sister, but that's all. He betrayed his king and best friend by hiding the rightful heir to the throne, he betrayed his wife by making her believe in it, he betrayed Jon by never telling him the truth about who he is. I'd say Ned is anything but a caricature.

:agree:

Not to mention that becoming king is hardly one of Jon's dreams, so even if he is king in the end, he'll be just as miserable as we can expect anyone to be in ASoIaF.

I think Ned concealing jons parents is one of the most honorable things we've seen in the series. I remember aemon asking Jon if his father had to choose between honor and the people he loves what would he do. And Jon says he would do whatever was right. It seems like honor is more of an objective term in westeros, where if your actions are not in accordance with the kings law, it is dishonorable. So if we are all correct regarding rhaegar, Lyanna, and Jon and ned lying about Jon, then in the strict definition of what honor is in GRRMs world, what Ned did was dishonorable. But, add in the numerous variables to neds situation, and in my opinion, he could not have been more honorable. He sacrificed a hell of a lot to keep his his promise and protect his secret. He protected and innocent child, (the murder of the targaryen children apalled him imagine what the murder of Jon would have done to him) and at the same time protected Robert. Robert never completely recovered emotionally from losing Lyanna and still clung to the mindset that Lyanna was abducted. If Lyanna was in love with rhaegar and Ned presented Jon as a product of that love, robert wouldn't have really had any more room for denial and probably would've gone off the deep end. So I feel that if you look at the position Ned was in this was the definition of honor. He couldve told catelyn the truth so that she wouldn't think less of him but he obviously realized this knowledge is something he can't say "I'm gonna tell you something but you can't tell anyone else". He protected a lot of people at a great cost to his personal life.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see not telling Cat at first, but not after 5 years? 10 years? Seems farfetched to me. Cat wouldn't have to smother Jon in kisses, but surely it would be better to raise a kid in a household in which his step-mother didn't hate him. Again, this doesn't disprove the theory. I just think that it makes a story based on the theory weaker than it would be if Jon were simply Ned's bastard.

But if Lyanna said "Promise me..." that you won't tell anybody, then honor-bound Ned would not betray his dying sister's final wish.

On another note, what if Rhaegar convinced Lyanna about the Azor Ahai prophecy. He is AA, she is Nissa Nissa, and Jon is Lightbringer. Jon is "the sword in the darkness."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The plausible deniability angle might work, but it's pretty weak explanation IMO. Given what we know about the characters, It's hard to accept that Ned would allow a situation in which both Cat and Jon are miserable for decades. Cat obviously hated and resented Jon, and that hatred and resentment affected Ned & Cat's marriage. Ned cared for Cat and Jon both. I don't see why he would allow it to go on when he could end it with a simple explanation to Cat.

I'd rather go for the death bed oath. That would be considered a sacred promise not only in Westeros, and for someone like Ned, it would be something he has to fulfill at any cost. Cat's antagonism towards Jon is pretty much the only blemish on their otherwise remarkably happy and safe lives (by Westerosi standards).

Dany also survived being burned by Drogon's fire in ADWD. It burnt off her hair, nothing more. Maybe Dany is a special type of Targaryen.

An the Dany thing - we don't know if Drogon's fire really hit her, or only her hair (ceratine burns quite easily). So, unless it's clearly stated that she survives a fire that sets her clothes aflame, I'll withhold judgement on whether Dany is fireproof; when forced to bet, I'd go for her being vulnerable by fire, though.

This was discussed in quite some detail in Apple Martini's thread.

Dany was never directly hit by Drogon's fire, she darted forward as he spat. Her clothes are not damaged by fire in the least. The fire either licked the tips of her hair, or the hair ignited from the temperature near the flame; either way, the hair burnt at its own temperature, not at the temperature of the dragon fire. Burning hair can cause burns but there are also factors that can prevent it. She has deep blisters on her palms, which were most probably caused by the spear which she removed from Drogon's wound and the tip of which was half molten, so she is definitely not resistant to high heat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Ned concealing jons parents is one of the most honorable things we've seen in the series. I remember aemon asking Jon if his father had to choose between honor and the people he loves what would he do. And Jon says he would do whatever was right. It seems like honor is more of an objective term in westeros, where if your actions are not in accordance with the kings law, it is dishonorable. So if we are all correct regarding rhaegar, Lyanna, and Jon and ned lying about Jon, then in the strict definition of what honor is in GRRMs world, what Ned did was dishonorable. But, add in the numerous variables to neds situation, and in my opinion, he could not have been more honorable. He sacrificed a hell of a lot to keep his his promise and protect his secret. He protected and innocent child, (the murder of the targaryen children apalled him imagine what the murder of Jon would have done to him) and at the same time protected Robert. Robert never completely recovered emotionally from losing Lyanna and still clung to the mindset that Lyanna was abducted. If Lyanna was in love with rhaegar and Ned presented Jon as a product of that love, robert wouldn't have really had any more room for denial and probably would've gone off the deep end. So I feel that if you look at the position Ned was in this was the definition of honor. He couldve told catelyn the truth so that she wouldn't think less of him but he obviously realized this knowledge is something he can't say "I'm gonna tell you something but you can't tell anyone else". He protected a lot of people at a great cost to his personal life.

True.

Not to mention the fact that Cat has proven time and again that she can't be trusted to behave responsibly, but goes on her own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree about her not being trusted to behave responsibly. She has a different idea of what her responsibility is, that's all, plus a general lack of foresight. Cat can be trusted in so far as she will always do what she thinks is best for her family. If that is giving up her sister-in-law's son to get her husband or children out of hot water, that's what she'll do. If that includes capturing a man contracting out the deaths of her children, she'll do that as well. She doesn't have a lot of foresight, but she is ruthless with her family's enemies. She does trust the wrong people (LF, Lysa, ultimately Jaime and Walder Frey), and have an overestimation of her husband's ability to maneuver in KL, though.

I agree that keeping Jon safe is an honorable thing to do. Keeping Lya's secret has caused him some discomfort, but it didn't get anyone killed. Telling the secret would have been less honorable, and Jon may have been dead already if Ned had confided in Cat. Does anyone doubt that she would have used Jon's true ID to help Ned if she could have? Or, on the flip side, to support Robb's journey south (stepping around all the King in the North problems and maybe ending the story in book 2)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First post...and havent made it through all of the forum...but does anyone else think Jon could be the real "Aegon" and Young Griff/aegon is actually the son of Lyanna?

Welcome!

That would be an interesting twist, and with Martin anything is possible.

But, it was said that Aegon had Rhaegars looks, so unless Jon started out a blonde, and his hair got darker due to the Martel influence, which may be even stronger than Stark, and Lyanna had no affect on YG genes, I doubt it.

It would also mean Ned actually allowing someone he knew to be blood to be raised by strangers.

However, it would neatly answer why Ned chose "Jon" for his name.

It also may answer why YG, who is supposed to be older than Jon, actually behaves a little more immaturely- and this with him being raised in less than comfortable circumstances.

But I think Jon is R+L at the end of the day.

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...