R+L=J v 61

[J. Stargaryen]

And see, I love catches like that.

They say that the best writers begin with what they know.

We see him do something similar with Wun Wun, taking that symbology with from his favorite football team, (#11 NY Giants). I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't have a "Walder Frey" for a teacher, or a "Tywin Lannister" as that neighbor whose house you peddled by on your bike just a little bit faster, or whose yard you stayed out of.

Rhaegar is better than "Rongar," :), BUT, my maiden name was McDaniel, supposedly meaning Son of Domnall, "World Mighty." (I'm betting he was just large).

Rongar is close enough to "Ragnar" to be a cool viking name. I have decided this. :) But yeah, being able to trace these creations back to their possible origin can lead to some interesting finds.

I also had the same idea with Jon. It would seem fitting he names the "true heir" after the king of fantasy: JRR Tolkein.

I didn't even realize that. That's a potentially nice catch. It makes sense, especially the way you worded it.

<snip>

Welcome to the forums. :cheers: It's nice when one of the new additions around here already seems to have his or her head on straight. I'm guessing her based on the avatar, but you never know. :)

[Foothill]

A little bit off topic, but over the R+L threads I have read, this line cones up a lot..."Jon wont ever get to the IT. He is committed to the Watch and will stay as Lord Commander." (something along those lines)

I am doing a reread now, and I completely disagree with that. I think Jon is dedicated to fighting the Others, rather that the NW. He may not know it yet, but it is there in the text.

Anyone else think this way?...

[J. Stargaryen]

A little bit off topic, but over the R+L threads I have read, this line cones up a lot..."Jon wont ever get to the IT. He is committed to the Watch and will stay as Lord Commander." (something along those lines)

I am doing a reread now, and I completely disagree with that. I think Jon is dedicated to fighting the Others, rather that the NW. He may not know it yet, but it is there in the text.

Anyone else think this way?...

I think Jon's interaction with Qhorin Halfhand teachs us that there are more important things than strictly sticking to the vows of the NW. Defending the realm is the big picture. Whatever it takes to do that, you do it.

Also, I could absolutely see Jon ending up as a/the king. Or maybe he becomes king but dies. I wouldn't rule out a crown or throne in his future. And, honestly, I'm not sure why people hate the idea of him becoming king so much. It seems like Jon would be a pretty good king, which the people of Westeros deserve after so many years of incompetent rulers.

[Foothill]

I think Jon's interaction with Qhorin Halfhand teachs us that there are more important things than strictly sticking to the vows of the NW. Defending the realm is the big picture. Whatever it takes to do that, you do it.

Also, I could absolutely see Jon ending up as a/the king. Or maybe he becomes king but dies. I wouldn't rule out a crown or throne in his future. And, honestly, I'm not sure why people hate the idea of him becoming king so much. It seems like Jon would be a pretty good king, which the people of Westeros deserve after so many years of incompetent rulers.

:agree:

I am not saying I find him being king a foregone conclusion, but to say he wont because of his NW oaths is inaccurate, IMO.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Also, I could absolutely see Jon ending up as a/the king. Or maybe he becomes king but dies. I wouldn't rule out a crown or throne in his future. And, honestly, I'm not sure why people hate the idea of him becoming king so much. It seems like Jon would be a pretty good king, which the people of Westeros deserve after so many years of incompetent rulers.

I can too, but of Robb's kingdom and possibly the Vale. My aversion to Jon on the Iron Throne has nothing to do with any aversion to Jon himself or his skills. Rather it's about my aversion to the Iron Throne as an institution.

[Foothill]

Rather it's about my aversion to the Iron Throne as an institution.

I am curious why you think that? (not-sarcasm...serious question)

I am not a fan of it either, but only because of the people who are in power. Under the right leadership and with the right council, I can't see why it is a bad thing.

[Shepdeuce]

Aegon is Lyanna Stark's son and Jon is Ned and some tavern wench's whelp

[Foothill]

Aegon is Lyanna Stark's son and Jon is Ned and some tavern wench's whelp

Fuck me not this again... :bang:

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Aegon is Lyanna Stark's son and Jon is Ned and some tavern wench's whelp

Back it up with something.

I am curious why you think that? (not-sarcasm...serious question)

I am not a fan of it either, but only because of the people who are in power. Under the right leadership and with the right council, I can't see why it is a bad thing.

Just what I said, I think it's inherently corrupting and it symbolizes subjugation and brutality. I don't want Jon to have anything to do with it.

[Foothill]

Just what I said, I think it's inherently corrupting and it symbolizes subjugation and brutality. I don't want Jon to have anything to do with it.

We may have to agree to disagree here, but I think that is mainly because of the people involved, rather than the institution.

Though I am bias because I don't believe that power corrupts. I believe it corrupts only those who shouldn't truly have it. Which is why (under the right leadership) it can be a good thing. And I think Jon could bring that.

[Ruby Chevrolet]

I'm not even touching the naysaying because frankly at this point it seems like a giant waste of time. I think I have argued virtually every angle, knocked down virtually every limp counter argument and answered just about every question.

This made me think of Joffrey Barratheon and Tywin Lannister.

"I'm the king."

"Aerys also felt the need to remind men that he was the king. And he was passing fond of ripping people's tongues out as well."

[J. Stargaryen]

I can too, but of Robb's kingdom and possibly the Vale. My aversion to Jon on the Iron Throne has nothing to do with any aversion to Jon himself or his skills. Rather it's about my aversion to the Iron Throne as an institution.

Just what I said, I think it's inherently corrupting and it symbolizes subjugation and brutality. I don't want Jon to have anything to do with it.

There were kings before the Targaryens, so I don't think the IT symbolizes subjugation any more than Casterly Rock or Winterfell does. As for brutality, I guess I don't see the Targaryens as being especially brutal. Some of them have done brutal things, but others were quite reasonable. Aegon the Conqueror was capable of both.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

This made me think of Joffrey Barratheon and Tywin Lannister.

"I'm the king."

"Aerys also felt the need to remind men that he was the king. And he was passing fond of ripping people's tongues out as well."

I'm not ripping out anyone's tongues, just expressing a well-deserved sense of frustration with people who refuse to read the writing on the wall for whatever reason. I think you're probably due for a fisherman's daughter entry, hmm?

[Alia of the knife]

Rongar is close enough to "Ragnar" to be a cool viking name. I have decided this. :) But yeah, being able to trace these creations back to their possible origin can lead to some interesting finds.

I didn't even realize that. That's a potentially nice catch. It makes sense, especially the way you worded it.

Welcome to the forums. :cheers: It's nice when one of the new additions around here already seems to have his or her head on straight. I'm guessing her based on the avatar, but you never know. :)

Very true, and I'm looking forward to "Vikings" when it comes back this spring. I was very happy they renewed it.

[Foothill]

There were kings before the Targaryens, so I don't think the IT symbolizes subjugation any more than Casterly Rock or Winterfell does. As for brutality, I guess I don't see the Targaryens as being especially brutal. Some of them have done brutal things, but others were quite reasonable. Aegon the Conqueror was capable of both.

I agree. It's about the same thing as Winterfell. They have lesser lords who give them fealty. So does the IT, just on a larger scale.

[Queen‍‍‍‍‍‍ Alysanne‍‍™]

Aegon is Lyanna Stark's son and Jon is Ned and some tavern wench's whelp

Trolling? :rolleyes:

[Alia of the knife]

On the matter of Jon and IR, it's possible it could go either way.

I'm not fond of the idea that Jon take the IR either because I believe his fate is greater than a throne, though that fate could be fatal, or irreversible.

And I don't think he'd want it, but due to honorable Ned's teachings, if he is the last Targ. standing, he may very well feel it's his duty to take it.

We've already seen he can be "determined" in making the decisions he feels he needs to make, because if I remember correctly, at one point Samwell regrets helping him become LC.

As far as power vs. the person goes, I don't think all people become corrupted, but it is possible that people end up becoming what they didn't want to be. In Frank Herbert's story, "Dune," Paul takes the throne a hero but becomes a tyrant, the very thing he didn't want to be, but to some degree, had to be.

He later tries to correct it, even trying to destroy his sister.

So yeah, I think Jon could potentially go down the same route.

[Jon Icefyre]

Trolling? :rolleyes:

Trolling indeed, btw I'm absolutely in love with your avatar. No matter what we're talking about the lady of Galadriel is truly the fairest of them all lol!

[Queen‍‍‍‍‍‍ Alysanne‍‍™]

Trolling indeed, btw I'm absolutely in love with your avatar. No matter what we're talking about the lady of Galadriel is truly the fairest of them all lol!

Haha yep the wisest and the fairest of them all.

[Jon Icefyre]

There were kings before the Targaryens, so I don't think the IT symbolizes subjugation any more than Casterly Rock or Winterfell does. As for brutality, I guess I don't see the Targaryens as being especially brutal. Some of them have done brutal things, but others were quite reasonable. Aegon the Conqueror was capable of both.

:agree: Ya don't get me wrong I'd much rather prefer Jon to be KITN for personal reasons, but I don't have a problem with him ending up on the IT. either The funny thing for me, is that every time I think about Jon being king of anything, I always seem to have that flashback of the long and heated debate you and I had a while back about Jon becoming a legal Stark through Robb's will, in which you eventually convinced me was the most logical path. Just wondering do you still have that opinion? Because I certainly do lol.