R+L=J v.34

[dragontamer]

@Dragonfish

Ned's companions obviously weren't wraiths.... they were human beings. I don't see why pointing out the obvious that the non literal part is that. There must be something else.

And maybe I am reading too much in it but only because you are so certain that your belief about Jon's parents is true.

I find the whole Lyanna-Rhaegar thing a bit weird for my taste. If you take out all the prophecies and visions their story doesn't make sense.

And I was talking about a small host not an army of thousands. If I expressed myself wrongly I will rephrase, 5 or so knights sworn to Daynes perhaps, would serve better than common people.

And personally I have no problem at all with the frickin' army that protected the king and the rest of the family. But if you make a point by saying that the presence of the 3 at the ToJ meant that the king was inside and that the primary role of the KG is to protect the king then I will make a point by saying that despite any amount of an army in KL the KG presence was essential. And no I don't count Jaime.

[J. Stargaryen]

@Dragonfish

<snip>

And personally I have no problem at all with the frickin' army that protected the king and the rest of the family. But if you make a point by saying that the presence of the 3 at the ToJ meant that the king was inside and that the primary role of the KG is to protect the king then I will make a point by saying that despite any amount of an army in KL the KG presence was essential. And no I don't count Jaime.

The situations at the ToJ and KL are so drastically different that for you to use them in this way makes me think you're intentionally missing the point. Regarding Jaime's presence in KL, it's not really for you to say things like 'he doesn't count' or whatever. People don't wield that sort of power in arguments. He was there, so he counts. There is nothing further to contest on that matter.

[dragontamer]

Don't you think that makes more sense than what you're suggesting? Btw, are you even suggesting anything other than it could have happened because we can't rule it out. Because that isn't a valid argument.

The third person narration technique gives the opportunity to the writer to tell the truth but just the truth of that particular person.

For example, Barristan was wounded and miles away when Ashara killed herself. Now many readers believe that she is Lemore and very much alive. Are all these people wrong or is it Barristan not telling the truth? Well Barristan said the words and Martin wrote them but does this mean that he can’t be another unreliable narrator?

It’s not a jail free card, it’s a writer’s technique.

And yes, I think it's important to examine and value all clues and hints and not the only ones that serve our theory in order to be objective, so when I consider something as paradox I think about it.

[Dragonfish]

And I was talking about a small host not an army of thousands. If I expressed myself wrongly I will rephrase, 5 or so knights sworn to Daynes perhaps, would serve better than common people.

In the future, use the term "small group" or something like that. "Host" means a multitude of people.

In any case, I still don't see your point. Why would a few loyal, hand-picked knights be better than a few loyal, hand-picked servants?

And personally I have no problem at all with the frickin' army that protected the king and the rest of the family. But if you make a point by saying that the presence of the 3 at the ToJ meant that the king was inside and that the primary role of the KG is to protect the king then I will make a point by saying that despite any amount of an army in KL the KG presence was essential. And no I don't count Jaime.

Sorry, but Jaime counts.

[Lady Octarina]

For example, Barristan was wounded and miles away when Ashara killed herself. Now many readers believe that she is Lemore and very much alive. Are all these people wrong or is it Barristan not telling the truth? Well Barristan said the words and Martin wrote them but does this mean that he can’t be another unreliable narrator?

You do realize the weakness of your argument, right? Barristan might have seen Ashara pregnant, but he never saw her stillborn and he never saw her committing suicide - he heard about it from miles away, as you acknowledge it yourself. That's extremely different from Ned's situation: the ToJ scene we saw might have been a fever dream and not that accurate, but that doesn't change the fact that Ned's description is the only one we have and that no single element has come up since then to disprove it. And even more important: unlike Barristan's account of Ashara, Ned was actually there as an active participant in the fight against the 3KG. Don't pretend to believe that the account of an eye-witness and that of someone who just heard about it have the same relevance, for that's nothing but intellectual dishonesty.

[dragontamer]

The situations at the ToJ and KL are so drastically different that for you to use them in this way makes me think you're intentionally missing the point. Regarding Jaime's presence in KL, it's not really for you to say things like 'he doesn't count' or whatever. People don't wield that sort of power in arguments. He was there, so he counts. There is nothing further to contest on that matter.

You are correct. I should say that I don't count him because the way I see it Aerys and Rhaegar didn't count him too.

AFFC, Cersei : "Ser Harys had been thrilled by his appointment, too dim to realize that he was more hostage than Hand."

Well he wasn't locked up in a tower too but still considered hostage.

[dragontamer]

You do realize the weakness of your argument, right? Barristan might have seen Ashara pregnant, but he never saw her stillborn and he never saw her committing suicide - he heard about it from miles away, as you acknowledge it yourself. That's extremely different from Ned's situation: the ToJ scene we saw might have been a fever dream and not that accurate, but that doesn't change the fact that Ned's description is the only one we have and that no single element has come up since then to disprove it. And even more important: unlike Barristan's account of Ashara, Ned was actually there as an active participant in the fight against the 3KG. Don't pretend to believe that the account of an eye-witness and that of someone who just heard about it have the same relevance, for that's nothing but intellectual dishonesty.

Well I used the Sansa example but didn't make people happy either.

[The guy from the Vale]

May I ask why you think Jaime can't be both hostage and King's Guard? He certainly swore the oath by then, so he certainly technically is a KG. And as long as a KG is with the king, the rules are technically fulfilled.

The situation for the KG at the ToJ is vastly different though. They are the last remaining KG, so at least one of them has to be with the king, or they are breaking their vows. They say they are keeping their vows while refusing to go to Dragonstone to guard Viserys, so Viserys can't be the king - which would mean thatRhaegar had another son after Aegon, and since Elia couldn't have any more children, that leaves only a son with Lyanna.

[J. Stargaryen]

The third person narration technique gives the opportunity to the writer to tell the truth but just the truth of that particular person.

For example, Barristan was wounded and miles away when Ashara killed herself. Now many readers believe that she is Lemore and very much alive. Are all these people wrong or is it Barristan not telling the truth? Well Barristan said the words and Martin wrote them but does this mean that he can’t be another unreliable narrator?

It’s not a jail free card, it’s a writer’s technique.

And yes, I think it's important to examine and value all clues and hints and not the only ones that serve our theory in order to be objective, so when I consider something as paradox I think about it.

What technique are you talking about, lying? Bolded for irony.

You are correct. I should say that I don't count him because the way I see it Aerys and Rhaegar didn't count him too.

You might as well say 'I don't count him because, the way I see it, he doesn't count'.

As has almost surely already been stated, the fact that Jaime was also serving as a hostage does not preclude him from fulfilling the KG obligation of always having at least one around to protect the king. Fin.

[Ygrain]

You are correct. I should say that I don't count him because the way I see it Aerys and Rhaegar didn't count him too.

AFFC, Cersei : "Ser Harys had been thrilled by his appointment, too dim to realize that he was more hostage than Hand."

Well he wasn't locked up in a tower too but still considered hostage.

Ser Darry disagrees, when he reminds Jaime that he swore to obey so he should do just that.

And, since ser Harys could act as a Hand while being a hostage, Jaime could act as a KG.

[dragontamer]

To end this Jaime issue I will say one last time that he is of course a KG member. But he was chosen to stay in KL not for his valor or swordsmanship but to be used as leverage. I think that's clear enough.

Now if you suggest that the rest of the KG left the protection of the king and the 2nd in line to the throne to Jaime on a technicality that's ok but I disagree.

[The guy from the Vale]

To end this Jaime issue I will say one last time that he is of course a KG member. But he was chosen to stay in KL not for his valor or swordsmanship but to be used as leverage. I think that's clear enough.

Now if you suggest that the rest of the KG left the protection of the king and the 2nd in line to the throne to Jaime on a technicality that's ok but I disagree.

One single fighter isn't going to make a difference in a siege, most of the time. And Jaime was already one of the best swordsmen in the realm at that young age.

More to the point, the most direct threat to Aerys and Aegon was the rebellion - and three KG members were fighting against said rebellion, alongside Rhaegar on the Trident. For the rest of the war, they were mostly in KL.

[Winds of Winter blow cold]

I seem to talk about this everywhere but here. :laugh:

[RoamingRonin]

I'm nearing the end of my first re-read of the series and I've come to bend my knee to the theory. Can't see any other option. Poor Ned. Poor Jon. Damn Robert.

[Budj]

If Ned's fever dream is up to that much unreliability then I am applying this logic to my secret desire / theory of Mance being Arthur Dayne.

[andylow]

I'm new to this forum, so perhaps this has already been countered...

I don't believe R+L=J for the simple reason there was a 6th pup. All of Ned's children, including Jon, received a pup. You may try and argue that an adopted child is still one's child, but I don't buy it (within the context of the book).

[Wylla Manderly]

I'm new to this forum, so perhaps this has already been countered...

I don't believe R+L=J for the simple reason there was a 6th pup. All of Ned's children, including Jon, received a pup. You may try and argue that an adopted child is still one's child, but I don't buy it (within the context of the book).

But Jon is also a Stark from his mother's (Lyanna) side. So your argument doesn't count against L+R=J.

Edited for spelling - it should be against not again.

[Ygrain]

I'm new to this forum, so perhaps this has already been countered...

I don't believe R+L=J for the simple reason there was a 6th pup. All of Ned's children, including Jon, received a pup. You may try and argue that an adopted child is still one's child, but I don't buy it (within the context of the book).

And? His pup is separate from the others and entirely different, which clearly separates and differentiates Jon from the others, as well. There is no contradiction in this to anything. They are all Starks, bonded by blood, no matter whose Jon really is.

[Ygrain]

In another thread, I was alerted to a piece of info I missed:

“Honor,” she spat. “How dare you play the noble lord with me! What do you take me for? You’ve a bastard of your own, I’ve seen him. Who was the mother, I wonder? Some Dornish peasant you raped while her holdfast burned? A whore? Or was it the grieving sister, the Lady Ashara? She threw herself into the sea, I’m told. Why was that? For the brother you slew, or the child you stole? Tell me, my honorable Lord Eddard, how are you any different from Robert, or me, or Jaime?”

Why does Cersei think Jon is from Dorne? Did he travel with Jon from Starfall so openly? But how could he have sired a child in Dorne when there was no fighting down there and he went there only after the Rebellion was over - and I don't think he stayed there nine months, either. Furthermore, what story did he feed everyone that no-one ever suspected R-L? Did everyone believe him merely because Lord Eddard never lies? I find this difficult to believe about Varys etc.

[andylow]

But Jon is also a Stark from his mother's (Lyanna) side. So your argument doesn't count against L+R=J.

Edited for spelling - it should be against not again.

And? His pup is separate from the others and entirely different, which clearly separates and differentiates Jon from the others, as well. There is no contradiction in this to anything. They are all Starks, bonded by blood, no matter whose Jon really is.

In my opinion, you're stretching. I'm sure there are lots of other people of Stark blood, too. Why do they not have pups? Six pups for 6 children of Ned. Period.