Maxpey Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 OK, R+L=J confirmed.This basically makes it a fact.I hate how this is making me acknowledge the existence of the SW prequels........but here we go....Lyanna (Padme) dies in childbirth after her relationship with the "enemy", Rhaegar (Anakin), his adopter Ned (Ben) takes Jon (Luke) back to half of his biological family, where he grows up a normal kid, but feeling out of place.He goes on a grand adventure, not knowing his parentage, and discovers it at a crucial moment in a huge twist.It is R+L=J. Alfie Allen has spoiled it.GRRM might as well have just posted "R+L=J" on his website.Debate can end now..........mystery revealed.....Right? I mean, what the hell was he thinking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Natalie_S Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Rhaegar would definitely be a surprise to most readers (I think the mega fans who make crackpot theories and figured out R+L=J are a minority) and since it was depicted by Robert and the official history of a realm as a bad guy, it could make Jon go "NOOOOOOOO!!!!".I can't figure out the comment about incest, though.He didn't ask who Jon is going to be romantically involved with later, so I can't see how Daenerys could fit in the picture.The only thing we know for sure about Jon is that he has Stark blood... it sorts of seem to lead towards a Stark incest! :ack: (possibly Benjen + Lyanna???)But the comment about the War of the Roses suggests a long lost heir to the throne.So nothing really fits!I think that Alfie here is making at least one mistake:-He thinks that Rhaegar and Lyanna were somehow related-he doesn't know the history of the War of the Roses-(he actually hasn't seen Star Wars :laugh: )PS: I still think that R+L=J is 99% sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mediumjon Umber Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Seriously, the only character that would give me a "Luke, I'm your father" kind of shocking moment at this point is Hodor, except that Hodor, being Hodor, would phrase that line as "Hodor". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Well, if we follow the War the Roses reasoning, Henry Tudor (who eventually became King) didn't have a shadow of a claim to the throne: his father was the bastard son of Henry V's French widow and his mother the granddaughter of a bastard of Edward III's third son. Meaning his claim was not only a long shot and through the female line, but illegitimate to boot. Heck, even the King of Spain had a better claim. His throne was won on the battlefield. Perhaps that's where we're headed?Henry VII won the throne by conquest, yes, but you're technically incorrect about the legitimacy of his claim. The Beauforts, from whom Henry VII descended through his mother, were legitimized and were very much in the running for the throne. In fact, Margaret Beaufort should have been the Lancastrian heir to the throne, not her son.ETA: Oh, and Catherine of Valois' children with Owen Tudor were not bastards, as far as I know. She was a widow and was free to marry again, so she did, albeit to someone far below her station. Those children had no claim to the throne, of course, but they were not bastards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Damian Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Henry VII won the throne by conquest, yes, but you're technically incorrect about the legitimacy of his claim. The Beauforts, from whom Henry VII descended through his mother, were legitimized and were very much in the running for the throne. In fact, Margaret Beaufort should have been the Lancastrian heir to the throne, not her son.ETA: Oh, and Catherine of Valois' children with Owen Tudor were not bastards, as far as I know. She was a widow and was free to marry again, so she did, albeit to someone far below her station. Those children had no claim to the throne, of course, but they were not bastards.You know your English history apple, of course, you are a book Editor for profession after all. I still say that since Ned, through the name "Whylla" at King Robert, Whylla might be the name of a sister. GRRM has stated that the 3 riders do not have to be Targs, Dany, Jon and Jon's potential seperated at birth sibling are possibilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bear Knight of House Cole Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Jon and Darkstar twins? :dunno: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UselessOpinion Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Could this be suggesting that Jon survives the shanking at the Wall?I mean, if it's going to be a "Luke Skywalker" situation, then he has to be told and have that NOOOOO reaction, right? That means he has to be alive to learn. :wideeyed: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatrickStormborn Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Martin is hardly going to miss an opportunity to make his main characters have an incest moment, is he? This interview just seems to confirm a brief Jon and Dany fling. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrion_is_Omar Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 I think the DV situation just means that his father is someone he assumed was an enemy. Since Ned Stark spent his youth fighting a rebellion against the Targaryeans finding out he's really a Targaryean would qualify IMHO. It doesn't need to get any more complex than that.Completly agree. The stark and a generation of the realm ( Brienne for example) has grow up believing that Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna and therefore he was a bad guy.Knowing that he is Rhaegar`s son would be traumatic for jon because:1- If he is Rhaegar son and Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna, he is the product of rape.2- His grandfather Aerys killed his grandfather Rickard and his uncle Brandon. And growing up Stark you learn to hate king aerys and to love Brandon and Rickard3- He has the blood of family that is know for have several members that were crazy. ( the coin's theory)Beside, like many of you said Luke was raised for a uncle that was hidding him. Besides, in away, he had a claim to a throne, after all Darh vader proposed him rule the galaxy as father and son. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearsblood8 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Curious idea with the Aerys thing, I'd like it as an unexpected twist, but yeah, Alfie Allen is a great actor, but he also likes the Mary Jane, and being a great actor doesn't mean you'd score particularly high on a standardized test.He probably did score particularly high.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxpey Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 He probably did score particularly high....I was drinking water when I read this and spit it out, I was laughing so hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Night Gathers Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Even though I don't recall the plot to the Star Wars movies, it seems that what you guys have said about the parallels pretty much clears out the option that Jon actually is dead. Even though I don't think he is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
analeigh Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 I think some people are misinterpreting the incest reference for Jon. After Henry VII won the War of the Roses, he married Elizabeth of York to unite the Lancaster and York claims so that his children would have a strong claim to the throne (both through him and Elizabeth). Since the Lancasters and Yorks were both descended from Edward III, Henry VII was technically cousins with Elizabeth of York.Alfie probably meant to suggest that Jon may have to marry Dany to unite his Targaryen claim to the throne with her Targaryen claim. His claim is questionable like Henry VII's claim was, yet Jon could win the iron throne by conquest. In order to prevent future challenges to his right to the throne, he could marry Dany. Their kids would have claim to the throne through both parents then.Personally, I hate the idea of Jon and Dany together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howlin' Howland Reed Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Martin is hardly going to miss an opportunity to make his main characters have an incest moment, is he? This interview just seems to confirm a brief Jon and Dany fling. ;)Oh, I see. The NOOOOOOOOOOOO-moment is for us readers! ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatrickStormborn Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Oh, I see. The NOOOOOOOOOOOO-moment is for us readers! ;)The response of this fandom to a Jon x Dany fling would be GLORIOUS. It's the only reason I'm shipping it.. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Scabbard Of the Morning Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 As the originator of the A+L=J from years ago, I still advocate this as the best alternative to R+L=J theory.It just makes so much sense to me that the rumor of Lyanna's rape was so wide spread that there had to be some truth to it, also the entire elopement theory of Rhaegar/Lyanna seems contrary to their characters, particularly Rhaegar who seemed to be very contemplative and responsible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonfish Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 I've said this before in another thread, but I'll repeat here: A+L=J is highly unlikely, for the simple reason that Lyanna was not, as far as we know, in the same location as Aerys when Jon was conceived. It is also contradicted by the vision of a blue rose growing from a wall of ice, which is pretty blatant symbolism for Jon being the child of Rhaegar and Lyanna. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Scabbard Of the Morning Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Blue rose points to Lyanna as the mother, it doesn't have to have anything to do with the father. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonfish Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Blue rose points to Lyanna as the mother, it doesn't have to have anything to do with the father.Hardly. Rhaegar gave Lyanna a crown of blue roses, and presumably the roses she had with her in the tower of joy. They are both involved in the symbolism of the blue roses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Scabbard Of the Morning Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 The point is, she's the one associated with them, not Rhaegar. So the blue rose vision to symbolize her child is just as valid, and not a contradiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.