|
SPOILER WARNING If you only watch the show, this thread will spoil you of future events in HBO's Game of Thrones. Thread contains discussion of all books of the series A Song of Ice and FireClick Here for the spoiler-free thread. |
On September 03 2012 16:49 Sugarfluff wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2012 03:35 TheFish7 wrote:On August 02 2012 23:09 Telcontar wrote:
Jon is not dead. I know GRRM has no qualms with killing off main characters, but he has been building Jon up so much as one of the main characters of the series, that permanently writing him off at this point makes no sense at all. Most likely he'll reside in Ghost for a while (supported by the very existence of ADwD's prologue), and then either return to his old body (fixed by Melisandre), or become a 'good wight' like Coldhands. I still firmly believe he is Rhaegar and Lyanna's son, and he'll be the one to drive the winter back with his aunt, Daenerys' help. His will be the song of ice and fire. So Rhaegar Targaryen and Lyanna Stark are Jon Snow's parents. That is most likely true unless its the biggest red herring in book writing history... Were did this theory come from? It's been awhile since I read the books, but the only clue I remember about Jon's mother is what Davos hears when he is on his way to White Harbour. He gets shipwrecked before he arrives and recieves assistance, during this conversation he is told about Robert's first rebellion and how Eddard passed through the same way back then. Apparently Ed recieved help from some girl that he fathered Jon with. Am I completely misremembering that? Or was the "lord" of those islands just full of shit?  Edit: Looked up the passage. "At the dawn of Robert's Rebellion. The Mad King had sent to the Eyrie for Stark's head, but Jon Arryn sent him back defiance. Gulltown stayed loyal to the throne, though. To get home and call his banners, Stark had to cross the mountains to the Fingers and find a fisherman to carry him across the Bite. A storm caught them on the way. The fisherman drowned, but his daughter got Stark to the Sisters before the boat went down. They say he left her with a bag of silver and a bastard in her belly, Jon Snow, she named him, after Arryn." It isn't a perfect fit, true, but it isn't so far fetched to assume that Edd came back when the fighting was done and picked up Jon. Right or wrong I'd like to hear the bases for the other theory as I seem to have missed it going through the books.
Nah, Jon is the bastard son of Lyanna Stark (Eddard's sister) and Rhaegar Targaryen.
Basically Rhaegar 'kidnaps' Lyanna to the tower of joy, and stays there for a while. When he leaves, a large portion of the kingsguard (reserved to guard the royal family) stays with Lyanna at the tower of joy (she's obviously pregnant).
When Ned arrives she's covered in blood and very weak, although there's none that could've hurt her (she's giving birth). She makes Ned make 'a promise'. This passage comes back to Ned repeatedly through the book. He made her a promise. At first it's insinuated that it's something small (I don't remember exactly), but Eddard feels tormented by this promise and it's simply on his mind too much to be something small (it's actually the promise to keep Jon safe from Robert's hate of Targaryens).
Jon is also never referred to as Ned's son, and he never speaks of him as his son. It's always "of his blood" or so.
Ned is simply too honourable to go off and have children with anyone but his wife. It's just so out of character.
Google R+L=J or L+R=J (Rhaegar+Lyanna=Jon) to get boatloads of more reasons why it's pretty much the only possible explanation.
|
I agree, but also I believe the main reason is because Ned would never betray Cat and just randomly abandon his honor like that.
|
On September 03 2012 18:49 Euronyme wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2012 16:49 Sugarfluff wrote:On August 26 2012 03:35 TheFish7 wrote:On August 02 2012 23:09 Telcontar wrote:
Jon is not dead. I know GRRM has no qualms with killing off main characters, but he has been building Jon up so much as one of the main characters of the series, that permanently writing him off at this point makes no sense at all. Most likely he'll reside in Ghost for a while (supported by the very existence of ADwD's prologue), and then either return to his old body (fixed by Melisandre), or become a 'good wight' like Coldhands. I still firmly believe he is Rhaegar and Lyanna's son, and he'll be the one to drive the winter back with his aunt, Daenerys' help. His will be the song of ice and fire. So Rhaegar Targaryen and Lyanna Stark are Jon Snow's parents. That is most likely true unless its the biggest red herring in book writing history... Were did this theory come from? It's been awhile since I read the books, but the only clue I remember about Jon's mother is what Davos hears when he is on his way to White Harbour. He gets shipwrecked before he arrives and recieves assistance, during this conversation he is told about Robert's first rebellion and how Eddard passed through the same way back then. Apparently Ed recieved help from some girl that he fathered Jon with. Am I completely misremembering that? Or was the "lord" of those islands just full of shit? Edit: Looked up the passage. "At the dawn of Robert's Rebellion. The Mad King had sent to the Eyrie for Stark's head, but Jon Arryn sent him back defiance. Gulltown stayed loyal to the throne, though. To get home and call his banners, Stark had to cross the mountains to the Fingers and find a fisherman to carry him across the Bite. A storm caught them on the way. The fisherman drowned, but his daughter got Stark to the Sisters before the boat went down. They say he left her with a bag of silver and a bastard in her belly, Jon Snow, she named him, after Arryn." It isn't a perfect fit, true, but it isn't so far fetched to assume that Edd came back when the fighting was done and picked up Jon. Right or wrong I'd like to hear the bases for the other theory as I seem to have missed it going through the books. Nah, Jon is the bastard son of Lyanna Stark (Eddard's sister) and Rhaegar Targaryen. Basically Rhaegar 'kidnaps' Lyanna to the tower of joy, and stays there for a while. When he leaves, a large portion of the kingsguard (reserved to guard the royal family) stays with Lyanna at the tower of joy (she's obviously pregnant). When Ned arrives she's covered in blood and very weak, although there's none that could've hurt her (she's giving birth). She makes Ned make 'a promise'. This passage comes back to Ned repeatedly through the book. He made her a promise. At first it's insinuated that it's something small (I don't remember exactly), but Eddard feels tormented by this promise and it's simply on his mind too much to be something small (it's actually the promise to keep Jon safe from Robert's hate of Targaryens). Jon is also never referred to as Ned's son, and he never speaks of him as his son. It's always "of his blood" or so. Ned is simply too honourable to go off and have children with anyone but his wife. It's just so out of character. Google R+L=J or L+R=J (Rhaegar+Lyanna=Jon) to get boatloads of more reasons why it's pretty much the only possible explanation.
I guess this is all explained in the prequels? Pretty bad story telling on Martins part. Not so much having that part outside of the main novels, but offering such a strong conflicting indicator in them. I guess it might come up in more detail if Jon does turn out to be AA, which does seem likely, and his lineage is required in explaining that.
|
None of this is from 'prequels' or other sources, the hedge knight series takes place decades before anything in the main timeline.
|
None of this is explained in the prequels, which end roughly 50 years before Ned is even born.
It's not bad story-telling, it's just being subtle. It's the sort of thing the average reader notices at the second read-through and when the series is finished, it all makes sense.
On September 03 2012 18:59 Irrelevant Label wrote:
None of this is from 'prequels' or other sources, the hedge knight series takes place decades before anything in the main timeline.
God damnit...
|
On September 03 2012 18:57 Sugarfluff wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2012 18:49 Euronyme wrote:On September 03 2012 16:49 Sugarfluff wrote:On August 26 2012 03:35 TheFish7 wrote:On August 02 2012 23:09 Telcontar wrote:
Jon is not dead. I know GRRM has no qualms with killing off main characters, but he has been building Jon up so much as one of the main characters of the series, that permanently writing him off at this point makes no sense at all. Most likely he'll reside in Ghost for a while (supported by the very existence of ADwD's prologue), and then either return to his old body (fixed by Melisandre), or become a 'good wight' like Coldhands. I still firmly believe he is Rhaegar and Lyanna's son, and he'll be the one to drive the winter back with his aunt, Daenerys' help. His will be the song of ice and fire. So Rhaegar Targaryen and Lyanna Stark are Jon Snow's parents. That is most likely true unless its the biggest red herring in book writing history... Were did this theory come from? It's been awhile since I read the books, but the only clue I remember about Jon's mother is what Davos hears when he is on his way to White Harbour. He gets shipwrecked before he arrives and recieves assistance, during this conversation he is told about Robert's first rebellion and how Eddard passed through the same way back then. Apparently Ed recieved help from some girl that he fathered Jon with. Am I completely misremembering that? Or was the "lord" of those islands just full of shit? Edit: Looked up the passage. "At the dawn of Robert's Rebellion. The Mad King had sent to the Eyrie for Stark's head, but Jon Arryn sent him back defiance. Gulltown stayed loyal to the throne, though. To get home and call his banners, Stark had to cross the mountains to the Fingers and find a fisherman to carry him across the Bite. A storm caught them on the way. The fisherman drowned, but his daughter got Stark to the Sisters before the boat went down. They say he left her with a bag of silver and a bastard in her belly, Jon Snow, she named him, after Arryn." It isn't a perfect fit, true, but it isn't so far fetched to assume that Edd came back when the fighting was done and picked up Jon. Right or wrong I'd like to hear the bases for the other theory as I seem to have missed it going through the books. Nah, Jon is the bastard son of Lyanna Stark (Eddard's sister) and Rhaegar Targaryen. Basically Rhaegar 'kidnaps' Lyanna to the tower of joy, and stays there for a while. When he leaves, a large portion of the kingsguard (reserved to guard the royal family) stays with Lyanna at the tower of joy (she's obviously pregnant). When Ned arrives she's covered in blood and very weak, although there's none that could've hurt her (she's giving birth). She makes Ned make 'a promise'. This passage comes back to Ned repeatedly through the book. He made her a promise. At first it's insinuated that it's something small (I don't remember exactly), but Eddard feels tormented by this promise and it's simply on his mind too much to be something small (it's actually the promise to keep Jon safe from Robert's hate of Targaryens). Jon is also never referred to as Ned's son, and he never speaks of him as his son. It's always "of his blood" or so. Ned is simply too honourable to go off and have children with anyone but his wife. It's just so out of character. Google R+L=J or L+R=J (Rhaegar+Lyanna=Jon) to get boatloads of more reasons why it's pretty much the only possible explanation. I guess this is all explained in the prequels? Pretty bad story telling on Martins part. Not so much having that part outside of the main novels, but offering such a strong conflicting indicator in them. I guess it might come up in more detail if Jon does turn out to be AA, which does seem likely, and his lineage is required in explaining that.
so far this is all just wishful thinking and lots of theories
|
On September 03 2012 19:01 Skilledblob wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2012 18:57 Sugarfluff wrote:On September 03 2012 18:49 Euronyme wrote:On September 03 2012 16:49 Sugarfluff wrote:On August 26 2012 03:35 TheFish7 wrote:On August 02 2012 23:09 Telcontar wrote:
Jon is not dead. I know GRRM has no qualms with killing off main characters, but he has been building Jon up so much as one of the main characters of the series, that permanently writing him off at this point makes no sense at all. Most likely he'll reside in Ghost for a while (supported by the very existence of ADwD's prologue), and then either return to his old body (fixed by Melisandre), or become a 'good wight' like Coldhands. I still firmly believe he is Rhaegar and Lyanna's son, and he'll be the one to drive the winter back with his aunt, Daenerys' help. His will be the song of ice and fire. So Rhaegar Targaryen and Lyanna Stark are Jon Snow's parents. That is most likely true unless its the biggest red herring in book writing history... Were did this theory come from? It's been awhile since I read the books, but the only clue I remember about Jon's mother is what Davos hears when he is on his way to White Harbour. He gets shipwrecked before he arrives and recieves assistance, during this conversation he is told about Robert's first rebellion and how Eddard passed through the same way back then. Apparently Ed recieved help from some girl that he fathered Jon with. Am I completely misremembering that? Or was the "lord" of those islands just full of shit? Edit: Looked up the passage. "At the dawn of Robert's Rebellion. The Mad King had sent to the Eyrie for Stark's head, but Jon Arryn sent him back defiance. Gulltown stayed loyal to the throne, though. To get home and call his banners, Stark had to cross the mountains to the Fingers and find a fisherman to carry him across the Bite. A storm caught them on the way. The fisherman drowned, but his daughter got Stark to the Sisters before the boat went down. They say he left her with a bag of silver and a bastard in her belly, Jon Snow, she named him, after Arryn." It isn't a perfect fit, true, but it isn't so far fetched to assume that Edd came back when the fighting was done and picked up Jon. Right or wrong I'd like to hear the bases for the other theory as I seem to have missed it going through the books. Nah, Jon is the bastard son of Lyanna Stark (Eddard's sister) and Rhaegar Targaryen. Basically Rhaegar 'kidnaps' Lyanna to the tower of joy, and stays there for a while. When he leaves, a large portion of the kingsguard (reserved to guard the royal family) stays with Lyanna at the tower of joy (she's obviously pregnant). When Ned arrives she's covered in blood and very weak, although there's none that could've hurt her (she's giving birth). She makes Ned make 'a promise'. This passage comes back to Ned repeatedly through the book. He made her a promise. At first it's insinuated that it's something small (I don't remember exactly), but Eddard feels tormented by this promise and it's simply on his mind too much to be something small (it's actually the promise to keep Jon safe from Robert's hate of Targaryens). Jon is also never referred to as Ned's son, and he never speaks of him as his son. It's always "of his blood" or so. Ned is simply too honourable to go off and have children with anyone but his wife. It's just so out of character. Google R+L=J or L+R=J (Rhaegar+Lyanna=Jon) to get boatloads of more reasons why it's pretty much the only possible explanation. I guess this is all explained in the prequels? Pretty bad story telling on Martins part. Not so much having that part outside of the main novels, but offering such a strong conflicting indicator in them. I guess it might come up in more detail if Jon does turn out to be AA, which does seem likely, and his lineage is required in explaining that. so far this is all just wishful thinking and lots of theories
That's a bit condescending. It's fairly solid imo. There's obviously nothing final, as GRRM never said outright who Jon's parents are, but everything points towards it being Rhaegar and Lyanna. There are so so so many hints and references towards it in the books (and no, not the prequels. I'm talking the 5 book A Song of Ice and Fire series).
Edit. This is the full list: http://towerofthehand.com/essays/chrisholden/jon_snows_parents.html
Change the scope thing in the top to the number of books you've read in the series to avoid spoilers.
|
Ah I assumed it must have taken place in the prequels because you mentioned that Eddard finding Lyanna in the tower scene as if it had actually been part of the books, simple misunderstanding. I did like that essay, thank you for posting the link, a very compelling read. Although I wouldn't say the theory is as solid as some advocate it. Even though it is probably the case because it's the answer that would make Jons lineage most significant.
(As my previous statement about bad storytelling revolved around me believing a part was told outside the main series I take it back. I want to emphasize also that my remark was not a jab at the series or GRRM as a writer. His realism approach is incredibly refreshing and one of the main reasons a song of ice and fire is so good, but realism doesn't always make for good story telling.)
|
It isn't so much the strength of the theory itself as the lack of credible alternatives that makes it so compelling. The cover story with Wylla does not account for any of the questions raised by the events at the Tower of Joy and in Lyanna and Rhaegar's intentions in general or, from a meta perspective, does not allow for the apparent fact that there is something important and secret about Jon's parentage.
Edit: The strongest reason to question it at this point is that the show has failed to hint at it, but given the limitations of a show regarding such things it makes sense that they might plan to let it be a more sudden and unexpected thing.
Edit 2: Then again I believe "promise me Ned" was one of the cut flashback scenes that was shot and close to appearing in season 1, so it was at least on their agenda at one point as something important enough to want to fit in.
|
On September 03 2012 20:01 Irrelevant Label wrote:
It isn't so much the strength of the theory itself as the lack of credible alternatives that makes it so compelling. The cover story with Wylla does not account for any of the questions raised by the events at the Tower of Joy and in Lyanna and Rhaegar's intentions in general or, from a meta perspective, does not allow for the apparent fact that there is something important and secret about Jon's parentage.
Edit: The strongest reason to question it at this point is that the show has failed to hint at it, but given the limitations of a show regarding such things it makes sense that they might plan to let it be a more sudden and unexpected thing.
Good point about the show. Apparently the directors of the show have been given notes on GRRMs plans for his future books so that the show could continue in case of his death. As this is one of the big revelations, they ought to have started hinting at it as the books did.
|
On September 03 2012 19:48 Sugarfluff wrote:
Ah I assumed it must have taken place in the prequels because you mentioned that Eddard finding Lyanna in the tower scene as if it had actually been part of the books, simple misunderstanding. I did like that essay, thank you for posting the link, a very compelling read. Although I wouldn't say the theory is as solid as some advocate it. Even though it is probably the case because it's the answer that would make Jons lineage most significant.
The Tower of Joy scene is a dream sequence in the first book, when Ned's imprisoned.
|
On September 03 2012 20:20 StarVe wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2012 19:48 Sugarfluff wrote:
Ah I assumed it must have taken place in the prequels because you mentioned that Eddard finding Lyanna in the tower scene as if it had actually been part of the books, simple misunderstanding. I did like that essay, thank you for posting the link, a very compelling read. Although I wouldn't say the theory is as solid as some advocate it. Even though it is probably the case because it's the answer that would make Jons lineage most significant. The Tower of Joy scene is a dream sequence in the first book, when Ned's imprisoned.
Yes, however the scene was described with the speculations laid out as part of it. Without a reference I assumed it was an actual scene, not a scene with added speculation.
|
I'm not all one for flashbacks but I would allow HBO to give a visual imagination of the battle of the trident. I want to see Robert at his prime, with his stag armor and warhammer
|
On September 03 2012 05:48 aloT wrote:
1) Tywin didnt take power because even though he probably had one of the most powerful ,if not the most powerful individual army, he did not have the combined support of the North, the Riverlands, the Vale and the Stormlands.
2) Because it was "his" war, as well as him having distant lineage by marriage to the Throne
3) It was a theory, and there are many. Nobody knows.
4) He didnt slay the king, he only usurped him. That is why he is sometimes called the usurper by his enemies. The only reason he is not called that by his friends as well is because they would lose their heads.
5) He was only really consolodated as the mad king after the war and all the stories really got put together.
6) Communication broke down as soon as Starks started being killed or taken away.
7) the Targs did not have a dynasty for that long. They had a long era of control but so did many other Kings, some plans work and some plans fail irregardless of time spent planning.
1) But how does it make sense that the guy who was known for being responsible for all the prosperity of the Mad King's early reign wasn't able to take any power whatsoever from the Rebellion? It seems very foolish to me that he went off and killed the Dornish princess and her kids and all the Targs, rather than seek alliance with Dorne by returning Elia safely to them. Also, what the fuck was Rhaegar thinking, not approaching Tywin with an offer of peace before the battle at the Trident?
2) Meh... I still don't get it. All indications say that Robert was an irresponsible drunk (Lyanna tells Ned as much), and that is reign was fraught with both corruption and political mishaps. Also, his ties to the Targ line almost seem... like, why on earth would anyone care about that when you're rebelling against the Targs and slaughtering them all?
3) Seems pretty obvious that she didn't just run off, especially when she pretty much hated Robert and the idea of marrying him, and everyone and their mother loved Rhaegar.
4) He slew the guy who should be King. For nothing, I might add. (I should also add that Ned knows the whole time that it's pretty much for nothing and says... nothing about it.)
5. No, no, no. The Mad King had already been burning people alive for some time, and was widely considered to be insane. Not only that, but everyone knew that Tywin was the "real" ruler. Brandon Stark being... about as retarded as anyone could ever possibly be, that makes a modicum of sense. But the Daddy-Stark walking into an obvious trap and dooming both him and his son.... that's just flat out unrealistic.
6. Mmm.... I don't know... I still don't see why the rebellion didn't release a statement saying: "We are not in rebellion, we are just calling for Rhaegar to be King."
7. Oh, I see. Makes more sense, I guess.
|
On September 08 2012 02:34 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2012 05:48 aloT wrote:
1) Tywin didnt take power because even though he probably had one of the most powerful ,if not the most powerful individual army, he did not have the combined support of the North, the Riverlands, the Vale and the Stormlands.
2) Because it was "his" war, as well as him having distant lineage by marriage to the Throne
3) It was a theory, and there are many. Nobody knows.
4) He didnt slay the king, he only usurped him. That is why he is sometimes called the usurper by his enemies. The only reason he is not called that by his friends as well is because they would lose their heads.
5) He was only really consolodated as the mad king after the war and all the stories really got put together.
6) Communication broke down as soon as Starks started being killed or taken away.
7) the Targs did not have a dynasty for that long. They had a long era of control but so did many other Kings, some plans work and some plans fail irregardless of time spent planning. 1) But how does it make sense that the guy who was known for being responsible for all the prosperity of the Mad King's early reign wasn't able to take any power whatsoever from the Rebellion? It seems very foolish to me that he went off and killed the Dornish princess and her kids and all the Targs, rather than seek alliance with Dorne by returning Elia safely to them. Also, what the fuck was Rhaegar thinking, not approaching Tywin with an offer of peace before the battle at the Trident? 2) Meh... I still don't get it. All indications say that Robert was an irresponsible drunk (Lyanna tells Ned as much), and that is reign was fraught with both corruption and political mishaps. Also, his ties to the Targ line almost seem... like, why on earth would anyone care about that when you're rebelling against the Targs and slaughtering them all? 3) Seems pretty obvious that she didn't just run off, especially when she pretty much hated Robert and the idea of marrying him, and everyone and their mother loved Rhaegar. 4) He slew the guy who should be King. For nothing, I might add. (I should also add that Ned knows the whole time that it's pretty much for nothing and says... nothing about it.) 5. No, no, no. The Mad King had already been burning people alive for some time, and was widely considered to be insane. Not only that, but everyone knew that Tywin was the "real" ruler. Brandon Stark being... about as retarded as anyone could ever possibly be, that makes a modicum of sense. But the Daddy-Stark walking into an obvious trap and dooming both him and his son.... that's just flat out unrealistic. 6. Mmm.... I don't know... I still don't see why the rebellion didn't release a statement saying: "We are not in rebellion, we are just calling for Rhaegar to be King." 7. Oh, I see. Makes more sense, I guess.
1. How would Tywin get any power from the rebellion? He's like the minister of economy under Saddam Hussein. That's not considered a good thing when a new government rises.
He stayed neutral until it was clear that Robert would win, and then he murdered some Targ children in order to prove his loyalty, and managed to get Cercei married to Robert.
2. Robert was the obvious king because they (as in the Arryns, the Starks, the Tullys and the Baratheons) were fed up with the Targs and rebelled. Someone had to be king, and he had at least some royal blood. The rebellion was more about getting rid of the Targs than putting Robert on the throne.
4. He slew Rhaegar because he fought for his father the mad king, and because Rhaegar had taken his wife.
5. Let's not forget that this is before cellphones and media in general. Just because the people in King's Landing knows he's mad doesn't mean that the Starks on the other side of the continent who have practically no business with the king knows about his mental health. They're also driven by honour, so they'd do what's 'right' even though it would mean certain death.
|
"I did not come here to eat fruit."
|
Are there rumours about the release date already?
Not an exact date of course just like the year/season maybe?
|
No. Any and all theories are very nearly baseless hand waving.
A well themed for TL bet would be between LotV and winds. I lean LotV.
|
GRRM said definitely not 2013, hopefully 2014.
keep in mind though he also said ADWD in 2006 and it came out in 2011
|
With the show and wanting to get them out in time so that it can avoid passing the books and the knot that was the events of book 4/5 done there is perhaps reason to expect him to get them out sooner, but at the same time he isn't getting younger and money and attention can slow things down. The pattern of each release taking longer than the last could well hold. If you had to throw a date out there in terms of year the best bet is probably 2015, being the result of him saying "hopefully 2014" and then adding a conservative to moderate level of cynicism, but anywhere from 2014 to 2019 or so could be a valid guess.
There, my rendition of said hand waving.
I actually prefer this to the false hope that "soon" leads to or the cruel 'build no expectations, risk no disappointment' policy of "we may or may not be working on a third installment" of certain other things I wait on. In GRRM time we don't even set the clocks, it's not like it matters anyway.
Edit: I would link it again but I already did just a couple pages back, see "obligatory".
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
