Jump to content

The Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon Thread


Stark Future

Recommended Posts

I didn't pick up in subtle innuendo's of R=L==J until a re-read and then it was more of a ooooo what if?

then like others before me , my gut instinct says, nah this is a trick to throw me off .

He will probably end up being Ned's bastard son and that's all.

If there was a child between R and L, my thoughts are that said child is with Howland Reed in graywater watch.

I am probably wrong anyway. I always am.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lyanna wanted Ned to hide something, let's not forget the promise he's made to keep. Something happened and it all points to a child. It must have been an important child for three KG's to be there. Another note with regards to Lyanna being soaked in blood...who would have killed her, and why would they kill her? Just more info leading to a birth.

Didn't it also say somewhere that GRRM doesn't even tell Parris the direction he's leading his books? I could be totally wrong about this but I thought I read that somewhere. (Parris might have even said it, I'm not sure)

So in truth she could just be working with the same info that we have, other then having much more knowledge about the author.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another note with regards to Lyanna being soaked in blood...who would have killed her, and why would they kill her? Just more info leading to a birth.

The implication is she died in childbirth, I think. Jon was born, or whomever, but there were complications.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't it also say somewhere that GRRM doesn't even tell Parris the direction he's leading his books? I could be totally wrong about this but I thought I read that somewhere. (Parris might have even said it, I'm not sure)

So in truth she could just be working with the same info that we have, other then having much more knowledge about the author.

Umm, I don't think so. Martin has mentioned in many interviews how the scope of the story has changed over time, and even though the high points may be the same, getting there is quite different. In the quote you're probably thinking about, Martin was asked what would happen to the story if he suddenly got knocked off, which implies that Parris doesn't know everything that is going to happen. But for something as simple as who is Jon's mother and father, I can't see why he wouldn't tell his significant other.

Artanaro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But for something as simple as who is Jon's mother and father, I can't see why he wouldn't tell his significant other.

Simple? It's one of the biggest deals in the entire story and one the most debated of mysteries in the series, if not the most debated.

If Martin's keeping some information secret from her about the story, then this is quite likely one of those secrets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Simple? It's one of the biggest deals in the entire story and one the most debated of mysteries in the series, if not the most debated.

Ok, maybe "simple" is a bad word to use, but Martin must know who Jon's mother is at this point, so it's not like Parris asked him "who's going to be alive at the end of the series?" If Martin can answer, I don't see why he wouldn't.

Also, this is the most important part in the matter. If she doesn't know, why would she lie about having that knowledge? It's way too easy for the lie to get back to Martin, and I don't see Parris as the insecure type that must pretend to know more than she does to feel better about herself.

Artanaro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quoting from the post that started this thread:

So during the BwB London meet-up earlier this evening, GRRM's Significant Other, Parris, turned up (possibly one of the nicest people you will ever meet). During discussions about the series, she reiterated a point that she has made before, that R+L=J is an extremely obvious thing to do in the series, and George doesn't do obvious, leaving the likelihood of that theory being correct much reduced.

It doesn't imply Parris has been told by Martin. She is merely stating a view based on 'George not doing the obvious'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quoting from the post that started this thread:

It doesn't imply Parris has been told by Martin. She is merely stating a view based on 'George not doing the obvious'.

This isn't necessarily true based on the context. She's putting forth an arguement against R+L=J, not simply saying that this theory is obvious and George doesn't do the obvious. This means she has reason to believe someone else is Jon's mother. Who does she think it is and why is very important, since one reason she might think otherwise is because Martin told her. Even if he didn't, she has far more experience than us in knowing how he thinks and how he goes about making plot twists, so her judgement is still valid in that sense at least.

As I always say, people believe R+L=J because they refuse to fathom any other possible explanations.

Artanaro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope Martin doesn't pull a Robert Jordan and retcon his story because people figured out his little mystery. We all know that Mazrim Taim was Demandred and Jordan got mad because he wasn't smart enough to fool anyone. I hope Martin doesn't do the same thing with this. If R+L does not =J then what is the point of all of it. It would be a big disappointment to me if Jon was Ned's son by either Wylla or Ashara, not to mention a complete waste of paper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If R+L does not =J then what is the point of all of it. It would be a big disappointment to me if Jon was Ned's son by either Wylla or Ashara, not to mention a complete waste of paper.

You are right, that's why I take the idea of Aerys+L as a theory worth checking.

And Artanaro, my comment was to point that lying or stating a fact known to her by information not disclosed to the readers aren't the only options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She's putting forth an arguement against R+L=J, not simply saying that this theory is obvious and George doesn't do the obvious. This means she has reason to believe someone else is Jon's mother. Who does she think it is and why is very important, since one reason she might think otherwise is because Martin told her. Even if he didn't, she has far more experience than us in knowing how he thinks and how he goes about making plot twists, so her judgement is still valid in that sense at least.

It's curious how you answer your own questions at times.

- Why wouldn't Martin tell his significant other who Jon's mother is?

- His significant other might be dissuading us from the Rhaegar and Lyanna theory because she knows the actual answer.

Which is rather reason why Martin wouldn't tell her right there. If she's going to give things away, then Martin has every incentive not to tell her.

Not to mention her special experience gives her judgment no greater credibility - it can serve two purposes.

1) She knows better, so can give us a better idea of what to expect.

2) She knows better, so can give us a solid red herring to go chasing after.

If Martin doesn't want us to know who Jon's mother is yet, it serves his purpose entirely to conspire with his significant other to keep the reader guessing.

As such, her statement's effectively weightless. She could be betraying Martin's trust by giving up information he obviously doesn't want us to have yet, or she could be drawing people off the trail.

And anyone who wants to can just as easily twist her statements to suit their little pet theory. As such, it might as well be disregarded.

As I always say, people believe R+L=J because they refuse to fathom any other possible explanations.

No, they don't. I think it's entirely possible Ned might be Jon's father. A great deal many other people do, too.

Sure, there are folk like Craix who seem quite intent on Jon being a Targaryen. That's one end of the scale. Then there's the other extreme, where you lie, that absolutely refuses to fathom that it's a possibility.

Most people lie in the reasonable middle, believing one theory, but acknowledging the possibility of others. Folk like Seventh Pup, who thinks Jon's the son of Ned but realizes there's some validity to the Rhaegar and Lyanna theory, or like myself, who thinks Jon's a Targaryen but realizes there's some validity to the Ned and Wylla or Ashara theories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which is rather reason why Martin wouldn't tell her right there. If she's going to give things away, then Martin has every incentive not to tell her.

This is potentially true, but it doesn't explain why she thinks otherwise. Most people come to the conclusion that R+L=J. Why doesn't Parris? The simplest explanation is that Martin told her and I see no reason that he wouldn't trust her to not give away the secret, which she technically hasn't done. Making a comment that one theory is wrong isn't the same as validating another.

1) She knows better, so can give us a better idea of what to expect.

2) She knows better, so can give us a solid red herring to go chasing after.

I agree with this.

If Martin doesn't want us to know who Jon's mother is yet, it serves his purpose entirely to conspire with his significant other to keep the reader guessing.

But here's the problem with this position. He has given us countless evidence. People are thinking R+L=J based on some of that evidence. If Martin doesn't want us to know who Jon's mother is, then R+L=J is wrong on the simple point that it's one of the quickest conclusions people come to when reading the first book. If he does let us decipher the truth from the text, then we can make a logical conclusion based on what we know now. If everyone believes something to be true, and it is in fact true, that's almost as good as knowing. Parris has no reason to throw her comment out if everyone is just good at guessing. They will still think R+L=J no matter what.

And anyone who wants to can just as easily twist her statements to suit their little pet theory. As such, it might as well be disregarded.

Her statement has merit, but the degree is based on the individual. Generally, I just use Parris' statements to argue against people that say other theories are too complex. I never base my disagreement on her comments alone.

No, they don't. I think it's entirely possible Ned might be Jon's father. A great deal many other people do, too.

Yes, I was generalizing, but considering it applies to the majority, my point has weight.

Sure, there are folk like Craix who seem quite intent on Jon being a Targaryen. That's one end of the scale. Then there's the other extreme, where you lie, that absolutely refuses to fathom that it's a possibility.

This is because no one will give me a satisfactory explanation to my questions. Since there are explanations with other theories, I accept those over R+L=J. Since there are fact that go against R+L=J it is wrong.

Most people lie in the reasonable middle, believing one theory, but acknowledging the possibility of others. Folk like Seventh Pup, who thinks Jon's the son of Ned but realizes there's some validity to the Rhaegar and Lyanna theory, or like myself, who thinks Jon's a Targaryen but realizes there's some validity to the Ned and Wylla or Ashara theories.

This isn't true. Most people lie with R+L=J and most don't even give other theories any respect. How many times does someone generalize that people don't believe R+L=J because they just want to be contrary or think it's too obvious. Many many people. I can go down the list if you like.

Artanaro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is potentially true, but it doesn't explain why she thinks otherwise. Most people come to the conclusion that R+L=J. Why doesn't Parris? The simplest explanation is that Martin told her and I see no reason that he wouldn't trust her to not give away the secret, which she technically hasn't done. Making a comment that one theory is wrong isn't the same as validating another.

I agree with this.

Making a comment that gives away the biggest chunk of one of the biggest mysteries about the entire series kills the mystery immensely.

This isn't a matter of one theory being "wrong." It's a matter of completely shearing away what makes up one of the biggest deals about the book. About taking one of the most hotly debated, thoroughly discussed ideas, and saying "No, it's wrong."

It takes one of the mysteries that about three new posters a month comes in to start a new topic about and effectively say "No, all those clues you picked up on? Wrong!"

So, no. "Making a comment that one theory is wrong," when that theory is Rhaegar and Lyanna, is a massive frickin' deal.

But, as you your self said: She technically hasn't given away any secrets.

Instead, she's made a statement that's completely meaningless. You can say it supports the idea Rhaegar and Lyanna didn't birth Jon, but absolutely anyone else can call it a red herring.

So using her statement to try and support one theory or another is completely pointless. It neither adds nor subtracts to the debate.

This is because no one will give me a satisfactory explanation to my questions. Since there are explanations with other theories, I accept those over R+L=J. Since there are fact that go against R+L=J it is wrong.

You've given your argument and repeatedly had it torn apart, over and over again.

Not just with Rhaegar and Lyanna, but with Tyrion, and with the Knight of the Laughing Tree.

There's a common thread of disagreeing with popular opinion in your posts. If it's in your nature to be contrary, no one's going to be able to give you a satisfactory answer. But that's just it - your judgments nearly never come across as reasoned out, logical conclusions, as you so often like to claim, and then you even go so far as to decry everyone else as not thinking things through.

Which, simply put, is not the case. There's a reason with Rhaegar and Lyanna, with Tyrion as a dragonrider, with the Knight of the Laughing Trees identity, that you so often are disagreed with and it isn't because the large number of posters who've debated with you are dullards.

Just because one's in the minority, it doesn't make the individual wrong. However, it doesn't make one right, either. The simple variety of people who have answered your queries, who still find your points unsound, calls into question the strength of your arguments.

So quit asking for explanations when you know darn well what people will say, and quit telling people they haven't thought things through when you know more than a few folk have effectively posted multi-page essays on the matter.

Because, while it's all well and good to disagree, we have thought things through and it's condescending to say otherwise.

This isn't true. Most people lie with R+L=J and most don't even give other theories any respect. How many times does someone generalize that people don't believe R+L=J because they just want to be contrary or think it's too obvious. Many many people. I can go down the list if you like.

Most people believe in the Rhaegar and Lyanna theory. Of course, there are those who refuse to believe it's any other way - but then, that's to be expected when the majority believes Jon's a Targaryen.

If 10% of all advocates of one theory are hardcore believes, and, say, 60% of all users here believe in Rhaegar and Lyanna as Jon's parents...well, I think I'm around user 3,000-3,500 or some such? 4,000, 5,000 users? Many of whom don't post, mind you, but, still...that's roughly 2,200 or so people that support Jon as a Targaryen. Of which, 220 believe it with absolute certainty.

Of course, I pulled those numbers completely out of my nethers.

But it goes to show one point: You have absolutely no reasonable way of finding out how many supporters of Rhaegar and Lyanna are willing to concede that Jon might actually be Ned's son, even though they don't believe it. You'd need a poll of roughly 1,000 people, just as a start, to get a good idea of what they think. Or list over 200 hardcore Lyanna and Rhaegar advocates to show how many won't even grant the possibility that Jon could be Ned's.

Because other than that, you'll make your observations, which say one thing (most don't think Jon could be anything other than a Targaryen), I'll make mine that say another (most believe Jon's a Targaryen, but think it's possible he might be Ned's), and no one will come to any agreement.

Oh, though I suppose you could put me in the camp who thinks you're ruling out even the possibility of the theory based on little more than contrariness.

But then, I don't try convincing people to support the theory. Just that it's possible. Ruling it out entirely is what I find incomprehensible, in rather the same way I think supporting it without question is much the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^ ned and his sister!!! gross!!!!!! that is very far fetched if you ask me ;) he he

ppl and their crackpot theories I dont know :P

Incest wasn't rare at all in the timeset of this series. Not far-fetched truly.

Even if Jon is a Targ I will lose all respect for him if he leaves the wall.

If Jon is truly Rhaegars son, then it would been his prior responsibility to be King of the Realm. When the others come, it's not gonna be the wall vs. the others, it'll be the realm versus the others. How can you lose respect for someone who is taking responsibility to do what is right to do? Also, it's his responsibility to do if he is the true heir.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shewoman: I used three months as a decent place holder. It seemed right at the limit of what's reasonable. I'd say no later than three months, but possibly as little as one.

And keep in mind that three months goes from Lyanna slipping off with Rhaegar all the way up to Rickard's execution getting heard by Ned. First Lyanna needs to slip off. Then Brandon needs to know it's with Rhaegar. Then Brandon needs to get to King's Landing. Then message needs to get to Rickard Stark. Then Rickard Stark needs to get to King's Landing. Then Ned needs to find out Brandon and Rickard are dead before, at last, he marries Catelyn.

Three months is pretty reasonable, though I could see one month possibly as a stretch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Jon is Robert's son, why didn't Ned tell him that? Why couldn't Robert raise him?

Well first off he promised Lyanna for whatsoever reason, and if she made him promise, and he was roberts, there was reason for it. Not only that, Robert loved Lyanna and the fact of knowing he killed her, (in a way) would make him depressed if not angry. And the blame for Lyanna's death would fall on Jon. Not a very good father to son relationship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well first off he promised Lyanna for whatsoever reason, and if she made him promise, and he was roberts, there was reason for it. Not only that, Robert loved Lyanna and the fact of knowing he killed her, (in a way) would make him depressed if not angry. And the blame for Lyanna's death would fall on Jon. Not a very good father to son relationship.

Also, you need only look at Joffrey to see what a great father Robert is. Hell, by the time Jon was born/Ned arrived, Robert was already as good as king, if he hadn't been crowned yet, and Tywin's offer of Cersei as his Queen could have been accepted already. There is no way Cersei would put up with having Robert's bastard running around, especially with him being older than any of her children. Better to have the bastard be a potential confusion as to the second heir to Winterfell (Robb would still be first) than the first heir to the Iron Throne.

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...