EPT[TV/BOOK] *SPOILERS* Game of Thrones Discussion - Page 285
| Forum Index > Media & Entertainment |
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 Fire Click Here for the spoiler-free thread. | ||
|
moopie
12605 Posts
| ||
|
Dfgj
Singapore5922 Posts
On April 26 2013 06:32 ZasZ. wrote: I always considered it an omen for the warfare that was going to sweep the realm not long after, or perhaps the danger that Arya would find herself in and him realizing to his chagrin that it was probably a very good idea to get her rudimentary fencing lessons. It started as him doing something nice for his tomboy daughter but I think he realized it had more practicality than he would have liked. I saw it as that while he sees the cheerful, innocent scene of training, he's seeing in his mind the true purpose of such training - a purpose his daughter is seeking out. | ||
|
TheToaster
United States280 Posts
On April 26 2013 02:17 Slithen wrote: I think the 'Robb is betrayed' bit is actually meant to be Rickard Karstark killing the two Lannister captives. Damn now that I think about it, you're probably right. It's been a while since I read the book and I automatically interpreted "Robb gets betrayed" as his actual death. Completely forgot about the Karstark bit. Also, the royal wedding seems unlikely to be included now that I recall the book better. Probably just stupid bits about Tyrion struggling with his new position as master of coin. | ||
|
unkkz
Norway2196 Posts
On April 26 2013 07:52 TheToaster wrote: Damn now that I think about it, you're probably right. It's been a while since I read the book and I automatically interpreted "Robb gets betrayed" as his actual death. Completely forgot about the Karstark bit. Also, the royal wedding seems unlikely to be included now that I recall the book better. Probably just stupid bits about Tyrion struggling with his new position as master of coin. Doesn't the wedding happen in the second book? Tyrion has to marry Sansa first right? | ||
|
Reval
United States297 Posts
On April 26 2013 09:23 unkkz wrote: Doesn't the wedding happen in the second book? Tyrion has to marry Sansa first right? Tyrion's wedding happens in the first book. Joffrey's wedding is about halfway through the second | ||
|
TheKefka
Croatia11752 Posts
fuck me Also Tyrions last comment to his father when he was nagging about offspring was fucking priceless. | ||
|
BeyondCtrL
Sweden642 Posts
It's probably widely accepted that Jon is the bastard offspring of Rhaegar and Lyanna, and would be the successor after Aegon (assuming he is truly who he thinks he is) as the Targaryen heir. Dany, being a woman, by custom cannot have a valid claim against a male born to the first born. So at the moment her position as Targaryen heir is uncertain, and if my theory about Jon is correct, then the claim is invalid. The way that the Kingdoms have split at the moment leads me to believe that Jon is the one meant for the throne. He has the blood of Targaryens and also blood of Starks, which would grant him support not only in the north, but also in the south, and once Aegon dies (GRR is gonna kill him, so let's not pretend otherwise) and once Melisandre realizes that Jon is the one foretold and not Stannis (promting her to drop her support in favor of Jon) Jon's competitors to the throne will quickly fade away. Jon has all the blood ties to unite the warring factions. Jon appears to be dead at the end of the last book, and he might be, but we know red priests can resurrect people, aka Melisandre will do this after realizing Jon's "destiny" and her support will gain Stannis's troops since they are mostly following her, Aegon's demise will defuse the Targaryen supporters until they find out about Jon (I'll get to this in a moment) and rally to him, and finally the North will rally behind his claim as well since he is believed to be the last surviving male of the Stark line. Cersei's installment as Queen Regent will see the last threads of allegiance between Tyrell and Lannister broken, and since the Tyrells want to have their Margery in that place they will seek to support a new claimant, first being Aegon considering Varys then probably Jon, which Varys probably knows about too. The way that Melissandre finds out about Jon is that after Jon is betrayed and killed he is thrown into a fire to burn his corpse, as all corpses are in fear of being resurrected as wights. Being of dragon blood Jon's body will not be damaged, much like Dany's, which will catch the attention of the red priestess who resurrects him in the burning pit (Jon's wounds smoke in earlier chapters): "There will come a day after a long summer when the stars bleed and the cold breath of darkness falls heavy on the world. In this dread hour a warrior shall draw from the fire a burning sword. And that sword shall be Lightbringer, the Red Sword of Heroes, and he who clasps it shall be Azor Ahai come again, and the darkness shall flee before him." - Ahor Ahai Prophecy There are many clues in Jon's dreams (dream fighting the Others with flaming sword) and Melisandre's visions (when she thinks about Azor Ahai she sees a lot of things related to Jon). When Jon arises in the pit of fire he will draw a sword from the fire, something which Stannis did not do, and fulfills the wording of the prophecy. | ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
| ||
|
BeyondCtrL
Sweden642 Posts
On April 26 2013 21:10 -Archangel- wrote: Actually Jon is a bastard and has no claim unless all trueborn children and cousins are dead. Since Dany is not, she is heir. And if Aegon is real Aegon he is heir as he comes before Dany. True, but it may be that Rhaegar and Lyanna got married in secret, but the biggest problem here is that the North will not support the southern claimants and additionally the events that will unfold at the Wall will most likely leave Jon as the greatest hero of their time. Additionally Jon has the potential of being a Warg like Bran since he also has the blood of the first men and he might be able to control Dany's dragons better than she can. At this point it's pretty clear that Jon has the dragon's blood, but it's unclear if Aegon does, as Viserys did not have it either. Depending on how Eulon's/Victarion's plans with the Dragonhorn unfold it might be that we see Dany lose control over her dragons and have them whisked away by the Greyjoys to Westeros. Their appearance there and Jon's possible Warg powers can work out in his favor... | ||
|
Skilledblob
Germany3392 Posts
| ||
|
BeyondCtrL
Sweden642 Posts
On April 26 2013 22:13 Skilledblob wrote: all nice and dandy theories but there is no proof to Jon being a targaryen. It's all circumstancial at best. As far as the books tell us Jon is the bastard of Ned and the fisher woman who rescued him from the vale Uhm, there is a lot in the books that lead to the Targaryen theory... For instance Sansa once inquired Catelyn if Arya was a bastard like Jon because they shared the same dark hair and eyes, but Catelyn says Arya looks like Ned's sister Lyanna. Ned also, when contemplating King Robert's bastards thinks of Jon, his sister, and the promise which he made her shortly before she died. Considering the fates of Rhaegar's other children and Robert's obsession with killing all Targaryens (and Ned's anger at that disposition) it would not be insane to think that claiming Jon as his bastard would not only give Ned the chance to watch over her child but also protect his true identity; an identity if even remotely guessed at would have cost Jon his life. The prophecy which Melisandre follows is the same prophecy which Rhaegar believed, and coincidentally Melisandre's visions about this prophecy happens to be focused around Jon and not Stannis. And by your insistence that the books say nothing in between the lines I think the books directly mention another, Wylla, which Robert recalls Ned bedding and some other guy corroborating this story to Arya. Also many people think that Jon was named after Jon Arryn, but it's also very possible that Lyanna and Rhaegar decided that based on Rhaegar's bromance with Jon Connington ^^ | ||
|
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
Dany is not immune to fire So nor is Jon's corpse, possibly more resistant to heat but Martin said Dany being unburnt was likely a one time thing and due to magic, not her Targaryan blood. | ||
|
Skilledblob
Germany3392 Posts
in ADwD I think it's Jon Connington remembers about Roberts rebellion and he specifically states that Ned Stark was hiding in the Vale waiting for a boat to bring him the the North and in that time he farthered a child which he took with him. Connington also says that the fisherwoman that brings him to the North is the mother. I am much more inclined to believe Connington here instead of all those theories and wishful thinking. The biggest problem is the timeline. When Connington is right Ned farthered Jon in the vale with the fisherwoman at the beginning of the rebellion and after the rebellion he went for the boy and brought him to the north. On the other hand we dont know anything with any certainty about Lyanna and Rhaegar. What we do know is the he kidnapped her and that she died shortly before the rebellion ended. With Robert and Connington we have sources who explicitly state that Jon is Neds bastard. Lyanna and Rhaegar is wishful thinking. On April 26 2013 23:10 risk.nuke wrote: Jons parents have been to 99% confirmed to be Lyanna and Rheagar. Lets not pretend anything else. confirmed by whom? | ||
|
Gentso
United States2218 Posts
On April 26 2013 23:18 Skilledblob wrote: Ned himself had dark hair as far as I recall, so that's hardly a reason. in ADwD I think it's Jon Connington remembers about Roberts rebellion and he specifically states that Ned Stark was hiding in the Vale waiting for a boat to bring him the the North and in that time he farthered a child which he took with him. Connington also says that the fisherwoman that brings him to the North is the mother. I am much more inclined to believe Connington here instead of all those theories and wishful thinking. The biggest problem is the timeline. When Connington is right Ned farthered Jon in the vale with the fisherwoman at the beginning of the rebellion and after the rebellion he went for the boy and brought him to the north. On the other hand we dont know anything with any certainty about Lyanna and Rhaegar. What we do know is the he kidnapped her and that she died shortly before the rebellion ended. With Robert and Connington we have sources who explicitly state that Jon is Neds bastard. Lyanna and Rhaegar is wishful thinking. confirmed by whom? It was either for the show producers or book editors (think it's book editors), but George himself asked who Jon's mother is to verify they are worthy to work with his story. Also, Theon's actor asked George who Jon's mother was and he revealed it to him. He later said in an interview it will all come into fruition later as a bit of a "darth vader" situation. | ||
|
Skilledblob
Germany3392 Posts
On April 26 2013 23:23 Gentso wrote: It was either for the show producers or book editors (think it's book editors), but George himself asked who Jon's mother is to verify they are worthy to work with his story. I have seen that interview and both producers of the show dont say who they thought will be the mother. Jon is the biggest stereotypical character in the whole books so it would not surprise me if in the end the R+L theories are true. But what I do care about is that people try to sell this as proven fact and spin wild theories based on this while there is no actual real proof. | ||
|
sung_moon
United States10110 Posts
And no, I thought its been discussed before what Dany did at end of Book 1 was an act of miracle, not some passive trait that all true Targs cannot be hurt by fire. Also Varys knows many things, but I highly doubt anybody but Howland Reed at this point can truly confirm if Jon is a Targ. | ||
|
Conti
Germany2516 Posts
On April 26 2013 23:28 Skilledblob wrote: I have seen that interview and both producers of the show dont say who they thought will be the mother. Jon is the biggest stereotypical character in the whole books so it would not surprise me if in the end the R+L theories are true. But what I do care about is that people try to sell this as proven fact and spin wild theories based on this while there is no actual real proof. That's why people are 99% certain that the theory is true, not 100% certain.  It's still enough to assume it's true and go from there. It's certainly the more likely scenario compared to the alternatives. | ||
|
ZasZ.
United States2911 Posts
On April 26 2013 23:18 Skilledblob wrote: Ned himself had dark hair as far as I recall, so that's hardly a reason. in ADwD I think it's Jon Connington remembers about Roberts rebellion and he specifically states that Ned Stark was hiding in the Vale waiting for a boat to bring him the the North and in that time he farthered a child which he took with him. Connington also says that the fisherwoman that brings him to the North is the mother. I am much more inclined to believe Connington here instead of all those theories and wishful thinking. The biggest problem is the timeline. When Connington is right Ned farthered Jon in the vale with the fisherwoman at the beginning of the rebellion and after the rebellion he went for the boy and brought him to the north. On the other hand we dont know anything with any certainty about Lyanna and Rhaegar. What we do know is the he kidnapped her and that she died shortly before the rebellion ended. With Robert and Connington we have sources who explicitly state that Jon is Neds bastard. Lyanna and Rhaegar is wishful thinking. confirmed by whom? Why would you believe the word of Connington? He is a character only recently introduced to the story, who was on the opposite side of Ned Stark and Robert Baratheon with no real inside information to the events that occurred. His word is just as good as everyone else's who say that Jon is the bastard son of Ned Stark and Ashara Dayne or Wylla or this fisherwoman. Here are the facts that we know: 1) Ned comes back from Robert's Rebellion with a child that he claims to be his bastard son, but will not reveal any information to anyone about the identity of the mother. 2) Ned made some sort of promise to Lyanna, before she died, that haunts him right up until his death in A Game of Thrones. 3) There is no confirmation in the book (yet) about Rhaegar and Lyanna being Jon's parents, but there are plenty of overt and subtle hints, which we know GRRM loves to use to foreshadow future reveals. When all of these hints are put together, the R+L=J theory starts to make more sense than any of the theories actually provided by characters in the books, which are speculation as well. GRRM could of course throw everyone a curveball and not take it that route, but our "wishful thinking" is just as grounded in the reality of the story as Robert and Connington's "accounts," since they are both biased and were both not present at either Jon's birth or the death of Lyanna. When Howland Reed confirms that Jon is not Lyanna's son, then you might have some evidence that has more weight than the wishful thinking of fans. Right now it is all speculation, one way or the other. | ||
|
c0ldfusion
United States8293 Posts
On April 27 2013 00:03 ZasZ. wrote: Why would you believe the word of Connington? He is a character only recently introduced to the story, who was on the opposite side of Ned Stark and Robert Baratheon with no real inside information to the events that occurred. His word is just as good as everyone else's who say that Jon is the bastard son of Ned Stark and Ashara Dayne or Wylla or this fisherwoman. Here are the facts that we know: 1) Ned comes back from Robert's Rebellion with a child that he claims to be his bastard son, but will not reveal any information to anyone about the identity of the mother. 2) Ned made some sort of promise to Lyanna, before she died, that haunts him right up until his death in A Game of Thrones. 3) There is no confirmation in the book (yet) about Rhaegar and Lyanna being Jon's parents, but there are plenty of overt and subtle hints, which we know GRRM loves to use to foreshadow future reveals. When all of these hints are put together, the R+L=J theory starts to make more sense than any of the theories actually provided by characters in the books, which are speculation as well. GRRM could of course throw everyone a curveball and not take it that route, but our "wishful thinking" is just as grounded in the reality of the story as Robert and Connington's "accounts," since they are both biased and were both not present at either Jon's birth or the death of Lyanna. When Howland Reed confirms that Jon is not Lyanna's son, then you might have some evidence that has more weight than the wishful thinking of fans. Right now it is all speculation, one way or the other. So I agree that Jon's parents are R and L. That's the most believable theory given all the evidence we have so far. But I've always wondered what really happened with Ashara? We know that she danced with Ned at the tourney at Harrenhal. We know that Ned and Selmy were both infatuated with her. After which she was "dishonored". Selmy believes she gave birth to a stillborn child and then jumped off to her doom. There are theories out there that she's still alive (maybe even posing as the Setpa Lemore) but that seems really unlikely to me. What do you guys think is the best theory on what happened with her? | ||
|
BallinWitStalin
1177 Posts
Secondly, why the fuck would the three greatest knights at the time stick around protecting the "tower of Joy" if it was only the Prince regent's paramour and bastard child? They're the kingsguard, at that point they would be trying to protect the next in line, who would be Viserys if Jon was a bastard. However, if Jon was trueborn, with Aerys dead, aegon dead (which they would have thought at the time, although I subscribe to the "aegon is a blackfyre/fake" theory), and Rhaegar dead, Jon is next in line as the last remaining trueborn male descendent of the elder line. They were protecting the king. | ||
| ||
