R+L=J v.46

[Moët]

Thank you, really :blushing:

Not only for the - undeserved - compliments but for the timing. I made the mistake to get involved in another discussion and overall the level of the arguments (low) not to mention the level of rudeness (high) depressed me quite a bit. Ygrain brilliantly calls it 'hatefest'. For the first time I found myself deleting a reply before even posting it :stunned: The flow of nasty, snarky and plainly offensive remarks was such that I deemed my work of historical research, textual analysis and translation (English is not my mother tongue) to be utterly wasted. I wondered why keeping on reading a book if the distaste for certain key characters and/or the narrative choices of the author is so... overwhelming :dunno:

I told myself, just go back to your peaceful reading and lonely analytical challenges. Then I read your post and it reminded me that sometimes sharing thoughts can be fun ^_^

Sharing thoughts should be fun!!! The hatefest on some threads have just taught me to simply stay away from those types. Some people live to hate. I've never understood that, it takes so much energy, and I sure as shit don't need that kind of karma!

YOU, however, spread knowledge and insight which is MEGAAWESOMESAUCE Karma!

It is known.

:D

[Nine of Spades]

i read them today, as far as i can see the only evidence for him being legitimate is the prescence of the KG at the tower? pretty strong evidence of course, are there other pieces of evidence i'm missing?

Im not sure having 3 Kingsguard with the 3rd person in the line of succession makes sense. Whats more, if the marraige is not public knowledge Viserys has strong claim to the throne ahead of a "legitimate" Jon, setting the table for civil war. There were other considerations in play for the number of Kingsguard, probably relating to exactly what happened with regard to Lyanna.

I'll add that if Rhaegar believed that Jon would be a prophesized hero and that he should work with his sieblings (3 heads of the dragon) it would be logical to marry Lyanna so that Jon is legit, which will make him have supporters and followers in the upcomming battle , and also eliminate the possibility of a succession conflict between him and Aegon and Rhaenys.

How does making Jon legit lesson the chances of there being a succession conflict? It just clears one of the hurdles needed for him to claim the throne. And if the other lords dont recognize a secret polygamist marraige, it makes civil war much more likely if the line of succession passes Aegon, since both sides have a basis to argue from.

[corbon]

ETA: Now that you got me rereading this passage, I noticed that Lyanna addressed Ned as, "Lord Eddard," which is strange (and rather formal) especially when Ned addressed Lyanna as "Lya". It reminds me of the scene where Jon is trying to convince Ned of keeping the 5 direwolf pups, and he addresses Ned as "Lord Strak" rather than father. Just something I thought interesting.

That bit is where reality intrudes on the dream (note also that its also as the 'memory' part of the dream fades into 'wierd' dreamscape, with a 'storm of rose petals across a blood streaked sky'. Its not actually Lyanna calling him, its his steward trying to wake him up.

The first scream, not sure if that was Lyanna or Vayon Pool calling his name mixing in to the dream.

[Ygrain]

Im not sure having 3 Kingsguard with the 3rd person in the line of succession makes sense. Whats more, if the marraige is not public knowledge Viserys has strong claim to the throne ahead of a "legitimate" Jon, setting the table for civil war. There were other considerations in play for the number of Kingsguard, probably relating to exactly what happened with regard to Lyanna.

There is no-one else to be had for the protection of Lyanna and her child. Those assigned to her defence had to be both able and a hundred percent reliable, and that would only be the Kingsguard.

This is false. He thinks about Lyanna consistently throughout the first book and everytime he does it brings up a great sadness in him. In fact when he confronts Cersei Lannister about the truth concerning her and Jamie, Cersei say Lyanna's name and Ned thinks to himself that he wanted to cry and that's just from Cersei mentioning her. Just because Ned doesn't seem as sad about Lyanna in the TOJ dream to you, doesn't make it so. We know based on Ned's other refrences to Lyanna throughout the story that he's obviously just as if not probably more sadened by what happened to Lyanna than what happened to the noble knights.

I think there is more to it than just mentioning Lyanna - Cersei basically said that Robert destroyed his marriage by sticking to the memory of the girl who loved another. That would be a very bitter irony.

[Steve Stark]

Thank you, really :blushing:

Not only for the - undeserved - compliments but for the timing. I made the mistake to get involved in another discussion and overall the level of the arguments (low) not to mention the level of rudeness (high) depressed me quite a bit. Ygrain brilliantly calls it 'hatefest'. For the first time I found myself deleting a reply before even posting it :stunned: The flow of nasty, snarky and plainly offensive remarks was such that I deemed my work of historical research, textual analysis and translation (English is not my mother tongue) to be utterly wasted. I wondered why keeping on reading a book if the distaste for certain key characters and/or the narrative choices of the author is so... overwhelming :dunno:

I told myself, just go back to your peaceful reading and lonely analytical challenges. Then I read your post and it reminded me that sometimes sharing thoughts can be fun ^_^

Yeah, I see the rude comments all the time. At the same time there are great people on this forum, who will respect you even when they disagree with what you have to say. I think choosing your battles is key, so good on you. Keep reading, and keep throwing ideas out. There are those of us that come here to enjoy each other's company and to see what other people have to say about the books. I enjoy a good theory, a well thought out comparison to classic literature, and even some of the crazy nonsense people come up with. The more laughable theories are fun as well, such as the whole "Jojen paste" bit. Yet people get into these theories well enough to where even those theories start to make you wonder. That's where the magic is. Keep posting and ignore the hate. Some people just don't like to be wrong, or can't find a way to respect another person's opinion/thoughts. And for some unfathomable reason it's hard for some people to be a gentlemen/lady when they are hiding behind a keyboard.

[J. Stargaryen]

There is no-one else to be had for the protection of Lyanna and her child. Those assigned to her defence had to be both able and a hundred percent reliable, and that would only be the Kingsguard.

I think there is more to it than just mentioning Lyanna - Cersei basically said that Robert destroyed his marriage by sticking to the memory of the girl who loved another. That would be a very bitter irony.

The whole scene is about parents and their children, so when Cersei says Lyanna's name to Ned, he thinks of pale blue roses Jon.

[Ygrain]

The whole scene is about parents and their children, so when Cersei says Lyanna's name to Ned, he thinks of pale blue roses Jon.

Not sure here - this follows after he asks what Robert did that she hates him so. He could still be thinking about Jon as the product of the love of Rhaegar and Lyanna, but then not for the reason you mention

[J. Stargaryen]

Not sure here - this follows after he asks what Robert did that she hates him so. He could still be thinking about Jon as the product of the love of Rhaegar and Lyanna, but then not for the reason you mention

Like I said, the whole scene is about parents and their children. So it follows that Cersei saying Lyanna's name would cause Ned to think of Jon, almost reflexively.

[FrozenFire3]

Thank you guys for all the support... I was in dire need of group therapy LOL

Back to compiling lists ;)

Two updates to my old post concerning cast&crew's take on Jon's parentage and related topics:

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/83666-rlj-v45/page__st__80#entry4263982

Ciarán Hinds

And all this stuff with Jon Snow and his parentage! Maybe he's like Harry Potter, the Chosen One, and yet nobody actually knows.[...]

And the next time I have a scene with Kit [Harington], I can say, "Do you know where you come from?" And if he says, "Father ... " That's a bluff. "I know they told you, or you thought you knew, but anyway ..." Oh, good Lord! At this stage, anybody could make up anything, couldn't they? Crikey blimey! I can't wait to see what happens!

Bryan Cogman (two different interviews)

One of the big themes of the books is the characters’ relationship with the past, and I want that to be a huge theme of the show. It’s one I think will emerge more strongly as the series goes on.[...] A character like Rhaegar Targaryen, it’s safe to say in the books you know more about Rhaegar than you do at this point in the show. That’s on purpose. We don’t want to load up the front end.

Having said that, certainly the relationship to the past is very important seam in the saga, and it’s definitely one that we’re mindful of. We have been very judicious as to when we allude to the past... We have done it, Lyanna and Rhaegar have come up several times, but we’re playing the long game here. The relationship to the past, and the circumstances around the rebellion will all be visited somehow on the show. How we’re going to do that, and the devices we’re going to use, I don’t even know yet.

If you're interested in the full interviews I'll post another list ;) with the links.

[nirolo]

That bit is where reality intrudes on the dream (note also that its also as the 'memory' part of the dream fades into 'wierd' dreamscape, with a 'storm of rose petals across a blood streaked sky'. Its not actually Lyanna calling him, its his steward trying to wake him up.

The first scream, not sure if that was Lyanna or Vayon Pool calling his name mixing in to the dream.

This explains it perfectly. :bowdown:

[Lady Gwynhyfvar]

I'm not qualified to answer your question of why using a dream rather than a memory. Maybe butterbumps! has done a Ned POV re-read project, and you might be able to find your answers there.

As to the question of what is fact and what is imagined in Ned's dream, here is my take.

Ned's dream highlights several key factors for me:

1. Three KGs died protecting the ToJ.

2. The reasons given by the 3 KGs for defending the ToJ, and thus the reasons they died for, are as follows:

3. Lyanna was at the ToJ and she made Ned promise her something before she died.

4. Few people know exactly what happened that day (since of the 10 who fought that day, only 2 lived to ride away).

I take these four points as fact. Since it is also true that Ned only took 6 companions with him that day to the ToJ (a fact confirmed by GRRM), you have to ask what is left of the dream what is not fact? I say a very small part and of very little importance.

ETA: Now that you got me rereading this passage, I noticed that Lyanna addressed Ned as, "Lord Eddard," which is strange (and rather formal) especially when Ned addressed Lyanna as "Lya". It reminds me of the scene where Jon is trying to convince Ned of keeping the 5 direwolf pups, and he addresses Ned as "Lord Strak" rather than father. Just something I thought interesting.

While I agree with your interpretation of what is factual from the dream, I would add that the small parts that do not appear factual are actually (as is the nature of a dream) very important symbolically- the blood streaked sky with the storm of rose petals and Lyanna's bed of blood symbolize the birth of the child, the presence of the child and the death of the child's mother as has been discussed at some length above.This is most likely the answer to the question of why use a dream sequence as a narrative device- there are some points the author wants to remain hidden, so he offers a dream which is a mixture of reality and symbolism.

[Lux in Tenebris]

:agree: I couldn't agree more with you well said my friend. As far as the Tyrell thing goes to relate it to U.S. regions, I think while the Lannisters are seen as this all rich, politically powerful, and currupt Washington D.C. white house family, the Tyrells are more seen as the spoiled rich kids from the upper east side of Manhattan. They haven't really earned anything and seem to have had everything handed to them since day one. They were only stewards of the Reach until Aegon l promoted them to Highlord and Warden of the south for simply bending the knee to him after he defeated King Mern Gardener at the field of fire. As a whole they are extremely fake and don't seem to have any real sense of loyalty other than perhaps Ser Loras, they kind of just go whatever way the wind blows. If anything there just annoying but I agree I don't really see any event in the series that could possibly make anyone strongly hate them, they haven't really done anything that bad other than kill a monster who most ppl wanted dead anyway. As I said before they're more annoying than anything.

I'm not sure there is any evidence of this. To me it seems like they are very loyal to each other (to the point where they would plot to kill the king to protect their sister) and based on what we hear of Willas and what we hear/see of Garlan they seem to be honorable, respectable folks.

[Maxpey]

All good points. I can see that now. I've been swayed! Clearly, the dream still had a great deal to do with Lyanna.

My original point still stands, though. Why a dream? Why not a memory? I find it a curious narrative device to use. Especially when he highlights specific parts of the dream as matching what happened in real life, but not the rest which is obviously filled with fantastical elements that didn't happen in real life.

I'm not implying none of it happened, but can we accept everything narrated in the dream as a true memory of the actual events? Other than the very obvious dream elements?

To add a little more, IIRC GRRM said this was a "fever dream", meaning that we maybe we shouldn't take it as the gospel truth for what happened at the TOJ. Then again, maybe GRRM was just having fun with us.

[Aryastarkisawesome]

edit: Wrong thread

[Ser Vallon Snow]

Im not sure having 3 Kingsguard with the 3rd person in the line of succession makes sense. Whats more, if the marraige is not public knowledge Viserys has strong claim to the throne ahead of a "legitimate" Jon, setting the table for civil war. There were other considerations in play for the number of Kingsguard, probably relating to exactly what happened with regard to Lyanna.

How does making Jon legit lesson the chances of there being a succession conflict? It just clears one of the hurdles needed for him to claim the throne. And if the other lords dont recognize a secret polygamist marraige, it makes civil war much more likely if the line of succession passes Aegon, since both sides have a basis to argue from.

But if those three KGS tell the world the truthabout Jon who would deny them?

[The guy from the Vale]

Did GRRM gave any reason why he revealed Jon Snow as his heir? It could've been a good reveal on TWOW

I'm not exactly getting what you're trying to say here. AFAIK, GRRM didn't reveal Jon as Rhaegar's heir yet. All he did was plant the seeds of that reveal back in AGoT, which is often called foreshadowing and necessary for good writing. Some people figured it out from there, but it's nowhere near officially confirmed yet.

And I'm saying that as someone who's almost 100% sure Jon is Rhaegar's and Lyanna's legitimate son.

[Nine of Spades]

There is no-one else to be had for the protection of Lyanna and her child. Those assigned to her defence had to be both able and a hundred percent reliable, and that would only be the Kingsguard.

This would be true wether Jon is legitimate or illegitimate or even if there is a child there at all. The only reason 3 kingsguard makes sense is if Kingsguard are the only people who could be trusted. The circumstances of said lack of trust, and the importance of Lyanna are not clearly outlined. I think the only definitive conclusion that can be drawn is that A) Rhaegar thought Lyanna was important to guard and b ) those particular Kingsguard were the only ones he trusted. Whats more, I think the notion that they were there to protect Lyanna from the rebels may be off, I think it may be equally likely they were there to protect Lyanna from Aerys.

But if those three KGS tell the world the truthabout Jon who would deny them?

Renly, Stannis, and Joffrey all proclaimed themselves king, so really anyone with an axe to grind. But now if 3 KGS say hes not legitimate, and a bastard, that would be a major blow to any rebellion.

[MtnLion]

This would be true wether Jon is legitimate or illegitimate or even if there is a child there at all. The only reason 3 kingsguard makes sense is if Kingsguard are the only people who could be trusted. The circumstances of said lack of trust, and the importance of Lyanna are not clearly outlined. I think the only definitive conclusion that can be drawn is that A) Rhaegar thought Lyanna was important to guard and b ) those particular Kingsguard were the only ones he trusted. Whats more, I think the notion that they were there to protect Lyanna from the rebels may be off, I think it may be equally likely they were there to protect Lyanna from Aerys.

Renly, Stannis, and Joffrey all proclaimed themselves king, so really anyone with an axe to grind. But now if 3 KGS say hes not legitimate, and a bastard, that would be a major blow to any rebellion.

At the point where Ned tells them that their "prince Viserys" is at Dragonstone, they are making decisions about succession. The Lord Commander of the Kingsguard appears to have covered this in depth witht he other two prior to Ned's arrival, because we don't see a pause for discussion. At this point, they need to be sure that the king is guraded to the extent necessary for the conditions. Do they break one or more away to go to Dragonstone? No, they all stand firmly at their present location and defend the king.

[Eurybia]

At the point where Ned tells them that their "prince Viserys" is at Dragonstone, they are making decisions about succession. The Lord Commander of the Kingsguard appears to have covered this in depth witht he other two prior to Ned's arrival, because we don't see a pause for discussion. At this point, they need to be sure that the king is guraded to the extent necessary for the conditions. Do they break one or more away to go to Dragonstone? No, they all stand firmly at their present location and defend the king.

They also make the point that the person who is with Viserys isn't Kingsguard. He's a good man, but Kingsguard don't flee. Implied: the kingsguard stay to guard the king.

Off topic to the current discussion (and I'm sure this has come up many a time) but I was reading through ASoS last night, and I'd forgotten that whenever Jon and Robb dueled, Jon usually pretended to be a famous Targaryen knight. Foreshadowing? But mostly, I think it's adorable.

[Lady Gwynhyfvar]

At the point where Ned tells them that their "prince Viserys" is at Dragonstone, they are making decisions about succession. The Lord Commander of the Kingsguard appears to have covered this in depth witht he other two prior to Ned's arrival, because we don't see a pause for discussion. At this point, they need to be sure that the king is guraded to the extent necessary for the conditions. Do they break one or more away to go to Dragonstone? No, they all stand firmly at their present location and defend the king.

To this apparently eternal debate, let me add the following quote from ASoS, ch.67

"Sers." Jaime said in a formal tone when all five had assembled, "who guards the king?"

"My brothers Ser Osney and Ser Osfryd," Ser Osmund replied....

"Will they keep him safe?"

"They will my lord."

"Be seated then." The words were ritual. Before the seven could meet in session, the king's safety must be assured.

(emphasis mine)

In other words, it is the duty of the LC to assure that at least one KG remains with the king at all times. Since the three at ToJ are clearly aware that they are the only living KG, what in creation would they be doing standing calmly in front of a Tower in Dorne if the true king (Viserys?) were hundreds of miles away and unprotected? It goes against everything we know about the institution of the Kingsguard.