Haleth August 25, 2015 Share August 25, 2015 16 (14?) year olds aren't known for rational decision making, especially a girl who just gave birth, was bleeding out, and whose baby daddy was dead. Ned should have considered what was best for everyone though. He probably figured he could lay low for 14 or 15 years then ship Jon off to the Wall ASAP with no one the wiser. Link to comment
nksarmi August 25, 2015 Share August 25, 2015 Delta all of that (again, if it's true) is precisely why bringing Jon home to raise as his son was the dumbest damned thing he could do. He should have sent him home with Howland Reed and if later there was legend of a Snow or Sand or Leaf or whatever the bastards of Reed's land were called that looked one hell of a lot of like a Stark...."Looks like Brandon sowed a wild oat" "Karstark blood will out" "So Benjen Stark fathered a bastard by some town's woman and sent the boy to live with the Reeds." The ONLY thing that puts Jon in danger of being found out as Lyanna's son, if he is (and let's face it, he's not Ned's) ...is that freaking Ned dragged him home and raised him as a Higher born bastard rather than giving him to a blacksmith's family through Reed and paying for his keep. Oh and by the way? Reed would have known. So that blows all the "can't tell a flippin' soul without tremendous danger" out of the water and makes it an even dumber idea to take him back to Winterfell, should Reed prove untrustworthy. So he had to trust with every fiber of his being that Reed would keep the secret and not tell anyone exactly where to find the boy, but he couldn't tell his wife? I actually have argued in detail that Ned shouldn't have told Catelyn based on what she did with Jamie. I suspect if she had known about Jon, she would have sold him up the river in five seconds flat to save her daughters. But that isn't knowledge that Ned possessed ahead of time - unless he just read his wife well and considering how poorly he reads everyone else, that seems unlikely. It's much more likely that Ned promised Lyanna something that trapped him into the position he was in and rather than keep to the spirit of the promise and create a situation like you described with Reed - he acted on his sworn word to the last letter. I really think that was an issue for Ned - not knowing how to do "right" without doing "exactly right" if that makes any sense. Link to comment
Avaleigh August 25, 2015 Share August 25, 2015 Speaking of Ned's general dumbassery, I always found it insanely dumb how he reacted to Jaime when confronted with the news of Cat's abduction of Tyrion. Instead of being all: "Oh my, seems my wife has gone too far, I will rectify this immediately, never fear." He is all: "She totally did this on my order. Let's have a big fight!" Aaargh. Heaven Almighty, THIS. Just so impossibly stupid. He says this as he's freaking outnumbered. I think I stared for like two minutes at the page. 2 Link to comment
Delta1212 August 25, 2015 Share August 25, 2015 I think fostering him at Howland's Moving Castle would have made the most sense. It doesn't get a lot of visitors, the Reeds are extremely loyal and Ned could have still claimed Jon as his own and nobody would have batted an eye at the Warden of the North fostering a bastard child with a trusted friend and army buddy. He'd have been out of the way and in a safe place. I'm inclined to think it was either Lyanna's promise or/and the fact that Jon was all Ned had left of his dead father, brother and sister. His entirely family was just wiped out, and aside from Benjen up at the Wall, Jon was the only person left with a bold connection to those people. I could see some sentiment getting in the way of Ned deciding to send the kid away. That said, Speaking of Ned's general dumbassery, I always found it insanely dumb how he reacted to Jaime when confronted with the news of Cat's abduction of Tyrion. Instead of being all: "Oh my, seems my wife has gone too far, I will rectify this immediately, never fear." He is all: "She totally did this on my order. Let's have a big fight!" Aaargh. This I definitely agree with Ned's decision on. For multiple reasons. For starters, Ned is pretty sure that the Lannisters are behind both the death of Jon Arryn and the attack on his son, and that there is a war coming anyway. It'd have been better not to tip that hand so early, but he can't put that back the way it was once Cat had taken Tyrion. If he did disavow knowledge of his wife's actions, he is going to open her up to potential retaliation, weaken his own House and undermine his ability to lay those accusations in the future. He can't say "Oh no, it was all a big mistake. Here, I'lol help you get your brother back." And then turn around and lay those exact same accusations at Tyrion's feet later on. He'd look like an idiot. Plus, we're talking about kidnapping the son of Tywin "Rains of Castamete" Lannister. He's not exactly a "no harm, no foul" type of person. And finally, Ned has no idea what the circumstances of the arrest were and what may have happened that could have made it necessary for Catelyn to do it. Once he heard what had happened, he was left with a very narrow array of not very good options and failing to present a strong united front, especially with your family, can very easily prove fatal both politically and literally. I can't fault Ned for making a bad choice if there were no good ones, and in the face of what he was presented with, I think he made a wise decision based on the facts he had at his disposal. 4 Link to comment
Holmbo August 25, 2015 Share August 25, 2015 Also interesting point out Shimpy about Cat never saying Jon is Ned's son in the show. I can't imagine the reason for that is that they wanted it to seem like she doesn't think Jon is Ned's son though. For example when she speaks to him as his about to leave WF and says "You came back a year later with another woman's son" that was clearly meant to be a rebuke to him about hurting her.I think it's more a way to hint to the audience about there being more to Jon's parentage. Link to comment
ambi76 August 25, 2015 Share August 25, 2015 (edited) We'll have to disagree here then Delta, probably because I'm more of a Littlefinger sleezeball than an Eddard Stark, and would have just loved to lie and plactate that stupid Kingslayer (who was just itching for a fight and Ned handed it to him on a sliver platter) face* while going on with my business in the background. If Ned says he will deal with Cat himself team Lannister can't just up and kill her anyways, well they could, but that would be Joffrey levels of dumb on their part. *He lies anyway, because he definitely did not order Catelyn to arrest Tyrion, Branfestration notwithstanding. Edited August 26, 2015 by ambi76 Link to comment
stillshimpy August 25, 2015 Share August 25, 2015 (edited) Speaking of Ned's general dumbassery, I always found it insanely dumb how he reacted to Jaime when confronted with the news of Cat's abduction of Tyrion. Instead of being all: "Oh my, seems my wife has gone too far, I will rectify this immediately, never fear." He is all: "She totally did this on my order. Let's have a big fight!" Aaargh. I'm with you here. I've been so disappointed that thus far, the best summation of Ned's character has not actually been a line that Jaime utters or seems to be in the book anywhere: "Ned Stark. Good man. Terrible judgment." There's really only one scenario that would make Ned saying, "She did that on my orders." a wise move and that is if he was still Hand of the King because the Hand of the King would be seen to be acting in the King's name, almost no matter what he did and Jaime would have to take it up with the King present. Unfortunately, Ned's rather publicly told the King to take his Hand Pin and stick it somewhere in the vicinity of his Kingly left butt cheek. So the second scenario in which it would make perfect sense to say, "It was on my orders!" would be if he knew he could count on his best-friend since boyhood, who also happens to be the King, to back up the move. See approximation of where Ned told Robert to stick his pin, as well as having turned his back on his King after telling him, in essence, "you're not the man I thought I knew." Now, in fact, that's what ends up saving Ned's neck, because Robert totally hands him back the first scenario, which it is possible that Ned was counting on in the first place. In which case, the smartest thing to do would have been to say, "What is this? We must take this matter before the King immediately!" and feign some freaking ignorance for once. I'm no peace-maker. I'm closer to a riot starter, but Ned clearly foresaw the "He'll have me arrested and I'll end up before the King aspect of 'Oh shit, I have to bring this before Robert, quickly.' " ....he just failed to understand that Jaime Lannister would have his men killed, which is equal parts "well, who would?" and "anyone who suspected the Lannisters of trying to murder his son and while in the presence of a guy who cut a different King's throat, just as a for instance?" So it isn't as if Ned was surrounded by great options when that particular piece of dung dropped, but he failed to consider that Jaime would stoop that low. In fairness? Because Ned has essentially figured out the only way to get Robert back on his side immediately. No freaking way would he be okay with Jaime Lannister ordering Ned arrested and even as furious as he was, he's never let that go down.. Weirdly Ned had figured out a slightly better option than, "What? To the King!" who was pissed off at him...he figured out quite quickly how to make sure that Robert would be on his side by default. He just utterly failed to consider the "these are not people even marginally above the slaughter of innocent bystanders....oh...fuck." As for the "what Lyanna made Ned promise, I'm assuming it was to personally keep Jon safe and not let anyone know who he was and Ned, dunderhead that he was, couldn't send away a family member, couldn't bear to see him raised as Mikken's son while he kept watch from a disinterested distance and knew that if he told Catelyn the problem wouldn't be that she would ever, in a million years sell Jon out...because that would make him blood to her children...but that she might actually love and be fond of Jon. That's the worst part about the whole "Oh take him home to Winterfell" idiocy , he takes him to the one place where he'd be loved since he is a Stark, but he actually needed Catelyn to be at least distant from Jon or that jig is up right there. "She....likes her husband's bastard son?" would be that one step weirder (because seriously, that's an insult to his wife, to bring home his bastard son). Pity Ned never thought to ask Catelyn fake it to a believable degree. She's actually better at it by nature than Ned was. She's the one in the tavern with enough wits to say "I'm taking him to Winterfell!" with enough conviction that everyone there believed her. He didn't tell Catelyn, not because he didn't trust her, I assume....but because he didn't want to ask her to join him in the dishonor of lying, even if it was for honorable reasons, for Jon's entire life. It's a freaking pity he couldn't come up with the one lie that would have gotten pretty much everyone off the hook "He's my baseborn....nephew...given to me by the lover Brandon had taken. We raise him here in Brandon's memory. Catelyn understands." But I guess he was just too far above dishonoring the dead. Here's hoping Brandon was waiting for him on the other side, with Robert all "Gods you're a pain in the arse, here's what you should have done, you chucklehead" because whereas the age might be off by weeks or months....pretty much no one would ever know that. Edited August 25, 2015 by stillshimpy 2 Link to comment
Lady S. August 25, 2015 Share August 25, 2015 Also interesting point out Shimpy about Cat never saying Jon is Ned's son in the show. I can't imagine the reason for that is that they wanted it to seem like she doesn't think Jon is Ned's son though. For example when she speaks to him as his about to leave WF and says "You came back a year later with another woman's son" that was clearly meant to be a rebuke to him about hurting her. I think it's more a way to hint to the audience about there being more to Jon's parentage. It's not stated exactly, but in her monologue about Jon to Talisa, I think the line about being jealous of his mother makes very little sense if she didn't believe the babymama in question was Ned's mistress. And yes, I always took the line about coming back with another woman's son to be along the same lines. The emphasis is on another woman because that's the whole problem. 1 Link to comment
Delta1212 August 25, 2015 Share August 25, 2015 We'll have to disagree here then Delta, probably because I'm more of a Littlefinger sleezeball than an Eddard Stark, and would have just loved to lie and plactate that stupid Kingslayer (who was just itching for a fight and Ned handed it to him on a sliver platter) face* while going on with my business in the background. If Ned says he will deal with Cat himself team Lannister can't just up and kill her anyways, well they could, but that would be Joffrey levels of dumb on their part. *He lies anyway, because he definitely did not order Carelyn to arrest Tyrion, Branfestration notwithstanding. I feel a little silly using games as "real world experience" but it's all social dynamics, so I think it's still relevant. When I play a game "by myself" I tend to be Littlefingerish. Littlefinger's "strategy" is very selfish, and playing a game tends to be an inherently selfish thing. Your goal is to win over all your other competitors. By the end of college, if I ever sat down for a game of Risk with my friends, the first thing everyone always agreed on, and tended to emphasize it if we were playing with someone new, was to not listen to anything that I say. I'm very good at talking people into strategies that benefit me. I once, with three (albeit well-fortified) territories left sandwiched between two people who had the rest of the map split between them, managed to win by convincing one of them that if he attacked me, he probably didn't have the strength to finish me off in one turn, which would guarantee that the other person would be able to do so and get my cards. Better to attack the other person first and push them back a little so they couldn't swoop down and get my cards, which would pretty much guarantee them a victory with the bonus they'd get. They did so. The other person pushed back trying to retake their lost territory. And then I was free to play my cards, deploy a decent sized army and march straight through the defensive lines they had both just helpfully wiped out, drive around the map taking out territories from each continent so neither would be capable of deploying enough troops on their next turn to even retake what I captured let alone mount an attack and then plunk down in South America where neither was positioned to touch me. They never recovered and I won two turns later. On the other hand, for a few years, I became very involved with an online, text based, nation sim game. Joining an alliance of players was a must, and the inter-alliance politics cut could rather cut throat. And I mean that in a rather personal sense, as it was not uncommon for people to be driven entirely from the game as a result of poor politicking. I went from active in my alliance to being part of its government, to leading it, to helping build what was, for a time, the largest political force in the game centered on my alliance and our closest immediate allies. My alliance consisted of generally somewhere in the 150-200 player range. My bloc was around 1,500 people and our various satellite alliances and close allies added another 1,000 or so people. A funny thing happens as you become responsible for more and more people. I started out playing like Littlefinger as usual, but Littlefinger has the benefit that he doesn't actually care what happens to basically anyone else. When you have a few hundred people depending on the decisions you make to keep them protected, you start to care a lot more about sticking up for them, and that inevitably includes when some of them do stupid crap, even if dropping them like a hot coal would be easier. At least in the context of the game, I faced a lower stakes version of Ned's decision numerous times, and made both decisions. And nothing was more rage inducing than the times I had to give up someone I was responsible for protecting even when they brought it on themselves. And, in fact, getting a reputation for doing that was one of the major reasons another extremely powerful faction eventually fell. Because when you get a reputation for bailing on your friends, nobody wants to be friends with you. So maybe I can just relate a little to the position Ned found himself in, even if it's in the rather silly context of a game rather than being life and death. 2 Link to comment
mac123x August 25, 2015 Share August 25, 2015 From 2 pages ago about the Book!House of the Undying: Also, they probably didn't want to include overly specific premonitions of future events, as it would lock them in to certain storylines from the book that they might ultimately decide to exclude. Also it allows them to avoid a really big spoiler, namely the Red Wedding. Dany's vision of that was a little too on-the-nose, with the dead king having a wolf's head. If they'd included that in Season 2, the audience would have spent season 3 wondering when it was going to happen, and as soon as they realized that the wedding feast would be in episode 9, a lot of people would have figured it out and it would have lost some of the shock value. It's not stated exactly, but in her monologue about Jon to Talisa, I think the line about being jealous of his mother makes very little sense if she didn't believe the babymama in question was Ned's mistress. And yes, I always took the line about coming back with another woman's son to be along the same lines. The emphasis is on another woman because that's the whole problem. This scene was one of the deviations from the book that made Ned look even dumber. Catlyn monologued about how, when Jon was near death, she realized that she was a horrible person for taking out her anger at Ned on him, and she made a promise to the Seven that she'd treat him like one of her own. It was the perfect excuse for Ned to let her know the Big Secret, because she had a a plausible explanation for no longer treating him like garbage. "Yes, I resented him, but the Seven showed me the error of my ways." In the book, while he's rotting in a Black Cell, Ned thinks about what Cat would do to protect her children; I've always interpreted that as Ned knew full well that Cat would throw Jon under the bus in a heartbeat to save her kids, so that's why he never told her. 2 Link to comment
stillshimpy August 25, 2015 Share August 25, 2015 (edited) In the book, while he's rotting in a Black Cell, Ned thinks about what Cat would do to protect her children; I've always interpreted that as Ned knew full well that Cat would throw Jon under the bus in a heartbeat to save her kids, so that's why he never told her. Jon would be her nephew and would presumably go from being "bastard spawn" in her head to being the product of Lyanna's rape. I know, I know, no one knows on that stuff either, but presumably Catelyn would stop resenting Jon as the sign of her husband's dishonor. Catelyn doesn't just foam at the mouth and hate all bastards, they're common enough....she hates Jon because she thinks he's Ned's bastard son. Admittedly, she would still have some pretty personal reasons to hate Targaryens, but the source of her antipathy towards Jon is that he's allegedly the insult to her own honor that she has to live with....and whereas she did think about "For my own child, would I not have done the same?" when it came the whole "Bran Gets Shoved"...Bran's not related to the Lannisters. He wouldn't be the child of some stranger, he'd technically be her nephew. Also, in the whole "protecting her children" thing....why in the world would Ned ever think, "Yes, but if she had to choose to protect her own children" before the whole "What Jaime Lannister did for love " debacle? The man couldn't plan far enough ahead to get his children out of town before confronting Cersei Lannister, I highly, highly and I do mean highly doubt that back in the day he thought, "I'd better plan for what child-killing thing Catelyn would do to protect our babies." For starters, only one existed, but Ned found the murder of innocent children abhorrent....and whereas, yes, the Targaryen children had just been recently murdered, he'd presumably know that Catelyn, of all people, would share his views on the murder of a child that was related to him. Now wait, there's another way to take that monologue to Talisa (because god knows we parsed that out on a micro-level): The show has it that Lyanna Stark's abduction was what started the rebellion and that Catelyn resented the war, lost the man she actually did love first to it. That Jon is a product of the thing that started it all and she couldn't forgive him because of ...how was it worded again...? Who his mother was? Stumbler found some site that had all the transcripts from the show so we could always easily find the exact line. But there was just enough ambiguity in the line that it could be "...because she blamed Jon for being the product of the thing that started a war....the need to fetch Lyanna back from Rhaegar." I have always, always hated the Lyanna and Rhaegar are Jon's parents theory, so I was the first one in the door with "FINALLY, confirmation that Cat at least believes that Jon is Ned's son...." only to end up watching that notion get shredded by team "Jon's a Targ". Edited August 25, 2015 by stillshimpy Link to comment
Seerow August 25, 2015 Share August 25, 2015 Oh god I never thought I'd see anyone mention cyber nations again, much less here. Delta, I assume you're the same Delta from RIA? Link to comment
Lady S. August 25, 2015 Share August 25, 2015 Or maybe that it's that what the series sort of hints at -- that whatever the gig with Jon was, Catelyn was in on it but hated Jon nonetheless -- is supposed to also be the truth of the matter: That Ned fears that Catelyn would hate Jon even more if she knew that he was Rhaegar's son because she did love Brandon. The TV series makes it clear that she was supposed to be pretty smitten with him, at least as far Littlefinger can be believed. I'm not sure how far Littlefinger can be believed on anything, but even so I wouldn't consider smitten the same as in love. Sansa was smitten with Loras, and also regrettably, Joffers. The Catelyn/Brandon match was also one arranged by their fathers, when she was only 12, as she brings up when she and Ned talk about Robert's offer. But it's not clear how much time they ever spent getting to know each other since she wasn't leaving her home for his as Sansa was, so any visit would have meant his coming south to Riverrun. We don't know how often that occurred or how much unchaperoned time they had together when he did. She thought he was enough of a charming hunk that she looked forward to marrying him, but as she had little choice in the matter with the whole family duty bit, she'd probably be inclined that way unless he was as hideous as book Ramsay or old like Jon Arryn or had an obviously terrible personality. I remember when she's flashbacking to the fateful duel while watching Tyrion's first trial by combat, she thinks of how Brandon was the one she was promised to and she did her duty or something like that. Even if she was into Brandon enough to anticipate wedded happiness, I didn't get the feeling she knew he was the perfect guy for her and she would have picked him even if her father hadn't already done so for her. I don't think Ned was really insecure about Brandon being the love of her life after they'd been married for 15 years and had 5 kids together and had developed the partnership they had, not the way she was insecure about Jon's mother being the wife Ned really wanted. Even with Brandon's sudden and horrible death and the lack of a real mourning period, Catelyn's PoV seems a lot more hung up on the Jon issue than the Brandon-for-Ned exchange, so I don't think she'd be so resentful about Jon's origin if she knew he wasn't Ned's. Probably the years of lying is what she'd feel more upset about. Now wait, there's another way to take that monologue to Talisa (because god knows we parsed that out on a micro-level): The show has it that Lyanna Stark's abduction was what started the rebellion and that Catelyn resented the war, lost the man she actually did love first to it. That Jon is a product of the thing that started it all and she couldn't forgive him because of ...how was it worded again...? Who his mother was? Stumbler found some site that had all the transcripts from the show so we could always easily find the exact line. But there was just enough ambiguity in the line that it could be "...because she blamed Jon for being the product of the thing that started a war....the need to fetch Lyanna back from Rhaegar." The exact line was "I'd condemned this poor, innocent child to a horrible death all because I was jealous of his mother.", so I don't really see much ambiguity there. Here's the site I use to look up transcripts, btw. Link to comment
Delta1212 August 25, 2015 Share August 25, 2015 Oh god I never thought I'd see anyone mention cyber nations again, much less here. Delta, I assume you're the same Delta from RIA? Hi. Do I assume you're the same Seerow as, well, Seerow? Link to comment
nksarmi August 25, 2015 Share August 25, 2015 (edited) I don't think we can argue that Ned could foresee that a situation would arise where Catelyn would sell her nephew down the river if her children were threatened, but I do think that despite his outrage over Robert B's decision to try to have Dany killed - that he damn well knew his friend was capable of killing any threat to his crown. The fact that Jon would be a living representation of either Rheagar raping Lyanna (the woman Robert B spends 17 years obsessed over) or proof that Lyanna chose Rheagar over Robert B likely only adds to the danger Ned would - deep down inside - know Jon was in from his best friend. While Oberyn is desperate to get justice for his sister and niece/nephew - no one else in the realm seems to care very much about what happened to Rheagar's children. And if they do, they aren't voicing it while Robert B lives. And if Robert B felt any disgust over the death of innocent woman and children, he certainly didn't punish the Lannisters for it. Rather he married Cersei and ensured the family flourished. So I do think Ned could tell Jon's life was very much in danger from Robert B and perhaps claiming him as a bastard (since Robert had already started fathering them by then) was the only thing he could think of that would make his friend not even bat an eye at who this little baby was. I mean even claiming him as Brandon's bastard might have lead to suspicious minds wondering if that was the truth. Whereas, people so wanted to see a flaw in Ned that him fathering a bastard seemed to give him such a stain on his otherwise "perfect" record that rather than question it - people like LF probably celebrated it. Overall, rather it was strategic or just plain luck, I think claiming Jon as his bastard worked out pretty well in terms of keeping him safe and protecting his identity (too well perhaps since we are trying to figure out who could actually reveal and/or confirm Jon's true parentage in the story). And I think his reason for not telling Catelyn probably was as simple as not wanting to make her complicate in treason if the truth ever came out. I'm not saying it was his best choice, but I think that is his reason. Personally, I think in hindsight Catelyn would have definitely sold Jon out if she thought it would help her get Sansa and Ayra back. I mean when she releases Jamie, she severally hurts Robb's command and that's her first born son. I don't think Ned's nephew would have matter all that much at all to her in the same situation. Edited August 25, 2015 by nksarmi 1 Link to comment
Seerow August 25, 2015 Share August 25, 2015 Hi. Do I assume you're the same Seerow as, well, Seerow? Clearly. /wave On topic: ...yeah I got nothin' to add here. All this talk of Jon's parentage bores me when it inevitably creeps up into any ASOIAF discussion. So guess I'll just sit back and wait for Shimpy to read a new chapter to change the topic. Blackwater should be coming up soon, right? That ought to be fun. Link to comment
stillshimpy August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 (edited) Gloriously, I am now allowed to do things like search on Youtube. She does say she's jealous of Jon's mother, but there is STILL ambiguity to it, because Brandon allegedly ran off to fetch Lyanna and was burned to a crisp. So the argument ran that she -- again, never referring to Jon as Ned's son -- was jealous that Lyanna was more important to Brandon. She says "give him the Stark name" not "claim him as a son". Dude, there is ambiguity to it and trust me, I was about ready to pitch a freaking fit at the time because I thought that settled the matter....but no. If you slice and dice it just right, you can still get wiggle room for "Catelyn knew and never once referred to Jon as Ned's son, but rather another woman's child" : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zF2znBOs7w ETA: I've read a Theon chapter (oh holy hell) and then also I've met Ygritte and learned of Bael the Bard. Yet another fun instance of "History is shaped by those who teach it, as much as by what actually happened." Now I'm in a Sansa chapter, wanting Dontos to fall overboard of just about anything. More on Theon's chapter tomorrow, that was definitely my first case of "Nooooooooo, don't stop there!!! Tell me more NOW!" Edited August 26, 2015 by stillshimpy Link to comment
Lady S. August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 Gloriously, I am now allowed to do things like search on Youtube. She does say she's jealous of Jon's mother, but there is STILL ambiguity to it, because Brandon allegedly ran off to fetch Lyanna and was burned to a crisp. So the argument ran that she -- again, never referring to Jon as Ned's son -- was jealous that Lyanna was more important to Brandon. She says "give him the Stark name" not "claim him as a son". Dude, there is ambiguity to it and trust me, I was about ready to pitch a freaking fit at the time because I thought that settled the matter....but no. If you slice and dice it just right, you can still get wiggle room for "Catelyn knew and never once referred to Jon as Ned's son, but rather another woman's child" : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zF2znBOs7w ETA: I've read a Theon chapter (oh holy hell) and then also I've met Ygritte and learned of Bael the Bard. Yet another fun instance of "History is shaped by those who teach it, as much as by what actually happened." Now I'm in a Sansa chapter, wanting Dontos to fall overboard of just about anything. More on Theon's chapter tomorrow, that was definitely my first case of "Nooooooooo, don't stop there!!! Tell me more NOW!" Are you sure this wasn't another spoiled-fan in disguise? Because Brandon's death was never connected to Lyanna on the show. Or were y'all just assuming the connection? I still think that argument is a hell of a stretch for ambiguity, so it must have been annoying if that was the kind of R+L=J discussions you were used to. Looking forward to more on that Theon chapter. I'm guessing not much further thought on Jon/Ygritte's first meeting if you're not that into his story, but I thought the book sl is still a lot better than what the show did with Jon in s2, where he basically comes off as a bumbling idiot more often than not. 1 Link to comment
stillshimpy August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 (edited) Because Brandon's death was never connected to Lyanna on the show. Or were y'all just assuming the connection? I still think that argument is a hell of a stretch for ambiguity, so it must have been annoying if that was the kind of R+L=J discussions you were used to. Well, no I have no way of knowing if that was a spoiled fan in disguise right now, but that was over on TWoP when it aired and that timeline was NEVER cleared up on the show, to this day. They never made it clear to this day what happened in what order. If Brandon and Rickard Stark were summoned to Kings Landing and murdered there, or if Brandon and Rickard went to appeal to the King to have Lyanna returned, and were burned alive there. I have always assumed it was the latter, because of what Bran said to Osha in the tombs about how Lyanna was kidnapped and then Robert started a rebellion to get her back. I assumed that Rickard and Brandon had been murdered when they asked for her return OR they were all at court, the elder Starks were murdered and Lyanna abducted, but the show was as clear as congealed blood about what the order was and to this moment, I'm still assuming the order...because the books have only been slightly better. However, I take it we were right? So that must mean the show did a slightly better job than I'd have given them credit for having done. But except for the rare instance of someone overplaying their hand and the mods catching them outright, it's been fairly rare that we ended up knowing that someone was a bookwalker. We did actually have someone who was finally busted over here at PTV that we'd all suspected for years and was key in the conversation....but I'm almost through the second book at all I know for sure was that Brandon was choked and Bran, at least, believed Rickard was beheaded and I still don't know the order exactly. I didn't know Lyanna's age for sure until someone upthread talked about it, but that's hardly a spoiler. The books have been maddeningly vague on all of this. Did you ever read the Unsullied thread, because dude, that type of conversation went down multiple times, yearly and each year, someone would forget that Jon had been burned by that lantern. We had a LOT of conversations about Jon's parentage, and yes, it was a bit maddening. Particularly since I was on the "he's Ned's son, just deal with it" team for four years....it became obvious in the fifth season that they were going somewhere else with that....and then I wasn't even halfway through the first book before it was pretty clear, "Oh shit, that kid isn't Ned's" so to my great joy...I personally wasted about a million damned words on the subject. So yes, a tad annoying, overall. Edited August 26, 2015 by stillshimpy 3 Link to comment
ambi76 August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 (edited) FYI ages at the end of the Rebellion (yeah, I'm a little obsessed with this stuff): Brandon 21 (dead) Ned 20 Lyanna 16 or 17 (dead) Benjen ? (it's unclear how much younger than Lyanna he was, probably around 15) Robert 21 Stannis 19 Renly 6 Catelyn 18 Lysa 16 Littlefinger 15 Edmure ? (could be anything between 9 and 15 probably closer to 9) Jaime/Cersei 17 Tyrion 10 Tywin 41 Rhaegar 24 (dead) Aerys 39 (dead) Rhaella 37 or 38 (dies birthing Dany) Viserys 7 Mace 27 Olenna 55 Loras 1 Margaery 0 Elia 26 or 27 (dead) Aegon 1 (dead) Rhaenys 3 (dead) Doran 35 or 36 Oberyn 25 or 26 Gregor 17 or 18 Sandor 12 or 13 Edited August 26, 2015 by ambi76 4 Link to comment
Haleth August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 On another topic, I believe it was in the chapter where Jon meets Ygritte that he has an interesting dream about Bran. It was something that I missed until this reread. And in old news, Ygritte is still annoying. 2 Link to comment
nksarmi August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 (edited) Woah, the Mad King is only 39 when he dies? For some reason, I always pictured him as being old (like 60 - which I don't consider ancient or anything - I just mean to say that I thought we were dealing with a man well past his prime) in his madness. I had no idea we were talking about what amounts to a middle-aged man. If that's the case, I wonder if his madness was less a case of inbreeding and more along the lines of syphilis gone unchecked. :) Edited August 26, 2015 by nksarmi 2 Link to comment
stillshimpy August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 (edited) So I was sort of wandering around the house this morning because I'm not fully caffeinated and that tends to lead to wandering and musing. In this case it started with "Wait, is today garbage day? Yes, it is....and I have curried Tofu that needs to get out of the house while the getting is good." So I then started a massive food purge from the fridge and just sort of gnawed away at the whole Ned/Cat/that whole thing with Jon and how Ned actually made life a little bit more difficult for Jon. Clearly Howland Reed would just know, regardless of whether or not Ned spoke the words when something occurred to me: Hey, isn't Howland Reed still alive in this story? In the Show he's dead. Jojen tells Bran that when they biff the introduction of the Reeds so badly, most of us thought they were Evil Agents of the Undead. In fairness to us on that, no explanation of "Why are you dressed like that if you're supposed to be the children of a Lord?" and they are practically garbed in Burlap, the Fabric of the Penniless Urchins of the world and it seems sort of convenient that it was Ned's very good friend, who is conveniently dead and that's why we aren't boogeying straight back to him. But I could swear that Heke/Reek/Actually Ramsay just manipulated Theon into killing some kids as props and weirdly, seemed to have come prepared for exactly that, which was some serious foresight on Ramsay's part. Turns out Ramsay Bolton is just a detail oriented event planner, born into the wrong universe, because the touch of remembering to bring a Wolf pin was damned near genius, but also a little odd the Ramsay seemingly planned for the Stark boys to get away. Then I remembered that "Oh wait, no one in the story knows he's Ramsay, so Martin might actually have been encouraging readers to think that Reek is truly helping the Starks?" Anyway, in that moment Theon thinks about the Reeds father and how bad it will be if those kids make it to Howland Reed. That's not quite as bad as the time The Tudors killed off all of English history after the reign of Henry VIII because they didn't realize that Henry's sisters might be important in their own right and made a composite character out of the two, but it did make me realize: Oh holy shit, in the books, the guy who actually knows what went down that day is alive.....and that's when I realized, "Oh, probably not for long....damn." That started me thinking about the whole "Why did Ned do things the way he did?" The best choice would have been to take Jon to Howland Reed's disappearing holdfast and have him raised there, but truly the story gives Ned sort of a big out on why he didn't do the right thing: Most of his family is dead. Two of them were murdered by their king, he's presumably just stumbled across the family member at the center of all of that, dying and in a kind cruel twist of fate, not from some terrible mortal wound inflicted upon her (which would at least seem like "these things do happen in war") but in childbirth....a thing that would have been just as likely to kill her even if she'd dutifully married Robert. But I can't buy that any of Ned's reasoning ran towards, "I must never tell Catelyn because she'd throw Jon under some magical, mechanical conveyance, powered by sorcery ....or a wagon either...." because thinking ahead in a chessmaster fashion was not Ned's strong suit and if tended to err on the side of anything in that regard, it was in believing that other people valued honor. So I think his reasoning would have run more towards not wanting to involve Catelyn in a lie that was...not actually treasonous. Rhaegar was married to someone else. If Ned left that tower with a baby, he was not spiriting the rightful heir to the Throne anywhere. One problem, of course, is that it isn't as if Ned could have taken a newly born child anywhere without a darned wet nurse (and he's also sort of have to Lyanna's dead body in tow....) so there's some "It's fiction, just go with it" type of suspension of disbelief on these matters. However, the question of why Ned, who was fool enough to warn Cersei while his own children were still in town, wouldn't trust Cat did finally hit me: He didn't know her. Pretty much at all. Sure he was married to her, but he'd grown up at the Eryie and she was engaged to Brandon (who she apparently did know) and Catelyn refers to having to wed this overly solemn stranger who presumably knocks her up very promptly and leaves for war. On the "solemn stranger" business ....Dude, his father and brother were just murdered by a crazy King and his sister is a captive....that would render the giddiest of souls somber. So it wouldn't have anything to do with "He knew in pinch that Catelyn Stark, recent Lady of Winterfell would throw Baby Mysterious Origin to whatever wolf pack came calling, demanding to know who he was...." He didn't know her well enough to know one way or the other, and he almost certainly would have erred on the side of believing in her honor, because that's what he did just in general. He just couldn't bear the thought of giving away one of three blood relatives he had left to his name. In the first book the repetition of "Promise me, Ned" gets a little bit "Okay, we get it, seriously....that's important..." but I've made the mistake of thinking that he kept thinking about that because she extracted a promise from him he didn't want to give. "Tell no one..." "Or love him as a son..." or whatever it was when actually it would be just as likely that he kept remembering that moment because he was watching someone he dearly loved die. The man had fought in wars and presumably watched people die hideously. Men, women, children....he wouldn't be a stranger to any of that because that is part of war and all that Arya sees makes it clear, War quite vividly sucks. However, it would have to be completely awful to witness all of that. To know your family has died for it, for that moment, to finally just get your sister back and take her home....and she's dying of something entirely mundane that might have killed her anyway....and it would have to be just awful. Just awful on a level that I'd never given any thought to until I was heaving out curried tofu and it struck me, "Oh holy crap, it's like the embodiment of a terrible existential dilemma: What's it all for, for what have we fought, died and created the ruin of the world we live in?" and he thinks that "Despite everything, it will have been for the reason I was fighting....to retrieve my family member and take her home....it was all for something..." So that's as likely the gig with Jon, if Ned exited that Tower of Joy with him, as anything having to do with his parentage. It doesn't have to be about "Targaryen! Conceal from Robert!" but rather, "This is why most of my family died. To bring our family back home." I don't think he really gave a whole bunch of thought to who was most likely to support Infanticide and who wasn't. He barely knew Catelyn. He hadn't even met his actual son yet and that promise needn't have been some super excruciatingly detailed thing, or so binding that the promise was the thing haunting Ned, as much as it was the worst moment of his life that he kept thinking about and was haunted by. He didn't see his brother and father die, but he presumably watched Lyanna dying fairly horribly. That may or may not have any validity to it, but it is one of the ways that the whole "Super Special Jon Snowflake" thing isn't as cheesy a detail. Admittedly, Ned's complete focus on the "Promise me, Ned...." really does suggest that he thought about what it was he promised....but one thing that Martin seems to excel at is having a psychological construct for a character....Ned seldom thinks of Jon in his POVs....but he does pretty much obsessively think about what was probably the worst moment of his life....watching his family die. ETA: On another topic, I believe it was in the chapter where Jon meets Ygritte that he has an interesting dream about Bran. It was something that I missed until this reread. I'm going to have to go and look for that, because I didn't really pick up on it. I fully admit, I've taken to sort of skimming Jon's chapters a little. Otherwise I just get bogged down in the Jack Londonesque descriptions of "the majesty of the very cold landscape...in lots and lots and lots ...and lots...and....lots of detail. So I was skimming right up until the "Aha! Ygritte! Who....WTF? Jon totally lets go on purpose and by instruction, which makes EVERYTHING about that Wildling story make more sense, Show!!! Why did you drop that detail and make it look like Ygritte took advantage of Jon's hesitation and escaped? He let her go! That's why she trusts him afterward! Dammit, Show!" ETA2: For the sake of my sanity, I try to ignore the ages of various characters, because Martin just makes a hash out of that entire business. Benjen Stark is younger than Lyanna? For freaking real??? How the hell does he end up at the Wall that young?? Does he freaking take the vow after the Rebellion, because that's bloody well daft if that's the case....and he was the character trying to sort of warn Jon "Uh, you might not want to take solemn chastity vows until such time as you've had some sex...so you know what you're giving up....Just a thought." And that would make no damned sense if he was the same age as Jon when he took his vows. Oh my God, I need an Advil. Edited August 26, 2015 by stillshimpy 3 Link to comment
nksarmi August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 (edited) Shimpy - I just had to Google it, but check the dialogue in regards to Howland Reed. As far as I know, he is still alive on the show. And in regards to Jon and treason - this is NOT a spoiler because from what I can tell there is nothing in the books to back up this theory, but I will tag it anyway.... There are those who believe some combination of events occurred so that Rheagar and Lyanna were legitimately married, making Jon the rightful heir to the throne - even above Dany. Now how the heck anyone would know that - I have no clue. But let's face it, even a bastard Targ might be used by many to overthrow Robert B if he wasn't doing so well. I personally think this speculation is by people who just want Jon to be king when it's all said and done and that isn't necessarily the ending I see coming for him, but I will still toss out what I've read. Speculation includes Rheagar taking Lyanna as a second wife in the old tradition of the Targs that first conquered Westerous and that is partly related to the "dragon has three head." Some people think Ellia might even have been ok with him taking Lyanna as a second wife/sister wife since her son would still be the first heir and they do things differently in Dorne (something the show emphasized in season five). Others believe because of Oberyn's phrasing about leaving his sister, that Rheagar set aside his first wife (Westerous version of divorce) and took Lyanna as a legal wife so that his third child was legitimate. Many people believe that the babe in Dany's House of the Undying vision is Jon as opposed to Rheagar's first son. Edited August 26, 2015 by nksarmi Link to comment
Delta1212 August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 Yeah, Jon's season 2 storyline goes a bit off the rails at that point. Everything about that whole mission and how Jon relates to the Wildlings and Ygritte and stuff Qhorin does all make significantly more sense in the books vs the show where everyone came across as sort of dim. 4 Link to comment
Delta1212 August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 Shimpy - I just had to Google it, but check the dialogue in regards to Howland Reed. As far as I know, he is still alive on the show. And in regards to Jon and treason - this is NOT a spoiler because from what I can tell there is nothing in the books to back up this theory, but I will tag it anyway.... Responding to the "really no reason to spoiler" point about even Rheagar's bastard being a threat: Definitely. Being the direct, rightful heir hasn't always been a pre-requisite to be the focus of rebellion either in Westeros or our world. I'm pretty sure women can't inherit the Iron Throne under current laws, but that doesn't stop Robert from being concerned that Dany would find support even though his own claim actually is better than hers in that case. And Renly is the rightful heir under no law, but he still found plenty of support. No, Rheagar's son, bastard or not, would be huge for any Targaryen supporters, Baratheon enemies or just straight opportunists. It's definitely treason and Robert would see it as such at the very least. 2 Link to comment
Triskan August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 (edited) Just a thought in passing (before I catch up with the latest posts) : shimpy, the Jon chapters ahead of you in this book are among my favourites of the books. I'm not necessarly speaking about Jon himself but more about the atmosphere and rythm. I hope you'll enjoy them (fully knowing this is not your favourite storyline at all !). ;) And from that point on, I'd advise you not to skim those chapters too fast, there are many interesting points the show never fully explored. :) Edited August 26, 2015 by Triskan 2 Link to comment
ambi76 August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 (edited) Woah, the Mad King is only 39 when he dies? Yup. He's often depicted (and described) to be looking more like 60 though, since he goes all Struwwelpeter (=zero body hygiene) after his imprisonment. Edited August 26, 2015 by ambi76 Link to comment
stillshimpy August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 The Mad King is imprisoned? Okay, so you guys think it would be treason? Well, then that explains why Ned would not include Cat entirely. Nothing about "didn't really know her at that point" or "would shove a child under a bus" needed. Treason equals a potential death sentence and that alone would be the reason Ned would never ask anyone to share that burden with him. Howland Reed is alive in the show?? Ooooookay. Now THAT'S interesting. Triskan, I promise to try and focus more on the land of Snow and Ice and Ice and Snow. Occasionally disrupted by tales of people being boiled in wine (yeah, that entertained me :-) ). I'm sorry, I do know Jon's a favorite and all, but it is the overly cutesy "He could be the rightful heir" stuff that kind of makes me dislike him....even when book Jon is sort of really huggable. It's just too....you know...twee, really. I'm going to tag this, because I actually have no clue if it is in the books. Mya has sort of indicated that it might be, but I'm not sure so goes Unless he's really dead, in which case, yup that would about fit this tale. But even though I sobbed all over the place, I doubt that is the case, because I'm assuming more people would be very openly freaking the fuck out, frankly. Tagged that for anyone who didn't watch season five. Unless I didn't need to, in which case about five people would be able to declare it safe or unsafe. 1 Link to comment
Delta1212 August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 Also just wanted to say, I loved the fact, which I didn't pick up on my first read through, that the story of how Bael the Bard disappeared and Brandon searched everyone before giving up only for it to turn out that he was hiding in the crypts below Winterfell comes immediately after Bran and Co. disappear and Theon searches everywhere for them only to give up. GRRM is a massive troll. 3 Link to comment
plurie August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 I'm pretty sure women can't inherit the Iron Throne under current laws, but that doesn't stop Robert from being concerned that Dany would find support even though his own claim actually is better than hers in that case. And Renly is the rightful heir under no law, but he still found plenty of support. Women CAN inherit the throne if there are no direct male heirs, which is the case (as far as anyone not named Howland Reed knows) in Westeros. Link to comment
Delta1212 August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 The Mad King is imprisoned? Okay, so you guys think it would be treason? Well, then that explains why Ned would not include Cat entirely. Nothing about "didn't really know her at that point" or "would shove a child under a bus" needed. Treason equals a potential death sentence and that alone would be the reason Ned would never ask anyone to share that burden with him. Howland Reed is alive in the show?? Ooooookay. Now THAT'S interesting. Triskan, I promise to try and focus more on the land of Snow and Ice and Ice and Snow. Occasionally disrupted by tales of people being boiled in wine (yeah, that entertained me :-) ). I'm sorry, I do know Jon's a favorite and all, but it is the overly cutesy "He could be the rightful heir" stuff that kind of makes me dislike him....even when book Jon is sort of really huggable. It's just too....you know...twee, really. I'm going to tag this, because I actually have no clue if it is in the books. Mya has sort of indicated that it might be, but I'm not sure so goes Unless he's really dead, in which case, yup that would about fit this tale. But even though I sobbed all over the place, I doubt that is the case, because I'm assuming more people would be very openly freaking the fuck out, frankly. Tagged that for anyone who didn't watch season five. Unless I didn't need to, in which case about five people would be able to declare it safe or unsafe. Well, remember, book five came out just after season 1 aired. With a couple exceptions everything you watched this past year was stuff we all dealt with shortly after you were first mourning the loss of Ned's head. You can only stay freaked out for so long. Plus, I'm pretty sure most book readers wouldn't seriously believe Jon was really dead even if they'd chopped off his head and burned the body. And since the books are definitely not farther along in Jon's plot than the show at this point, I wouldn't rely on anyone's reactions to indicate what "really" is going to happen. Link to comment
stillshimpy August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 Well, but again, it's not like people didn't sprinkle the land with baseborn children. Was Lord Velaryon or something? (I've since thrown that psychotic-looking envelope's worth of notes away, so I'm not sure) There's bound to still be people with Targaryen blood somewhere and if Rhaeghar was...oh let's say generous (and they've done everything but give him the soul of a poet and have him running around passing himself off as a singer) with other ladies, which would seem to be his wont then, yeah, other bastards elsewhere. Might make a difference because both parents were highborn, but Edric Storm isn't considered a threat to any succession, so it's rare for a bastard to be in line for anything. Also, I have already been exposed to the idea that "Maybe they were secretly married in three days and fourteen minutes since Rhaeghar's wife was murdered and he promptly married Lyanna" ....eh. Sure okay, if you're willing to believe that as likely and having anyone would rally round Jon...but that is a wild stretch, I think. It requires convoluting the entire universe of that fictional world into making Jon the Neo of Westeros....which is precisely why I don't care for the plot and have difficulty being able to stand the character for long. The whole thing that is supposed to sell this story, is that it does unexpected things ....but not "Sword in Stone" type of Disney stuff. Or maybe it does and maybe Martin will pull it off well, but I gotta say, I'm still hoping not. I hope that the point of it is that Jon spends a lot of time feeling "I have no identity, I am without a name, I search for myself....my mother was a nobody that my dad wouldn't even talk about...." and it would be more interesting to me if he's utterly horrified to find out "Shit, I am somebody and it's about the last person I'd want to be. Give me back my bastard status NOW!" because he'd still be the grandchild of the dude that killed most of Ned's family and his father brought about his mother's death. Link to comment
ambi76 August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 (edited) The Mad King is imprisoned? Um, that's some historical stuff pre-Rebellion not sure you would consider it a spoiler (will probably be mentioned in the series in respect to Ser Dontos, I think?) It's called The Defiance of Duskendale. Some Lord stopped to pay his taxes and invited the King to visit him and hear his reasons. That went over well. Not. Aerys was held prisoner by that Lord for a while (didn't help with the madness/paranoia to put it mildly). It ended all in Fire and Blood of course. Ser Dontos is the only person of that family that was spared a horrific death, because he was a baby and Ser Barristan pleaded for him. Edited August 26, 2015 by ambi76 1 Link to comment
Delta1212 August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 shimpy, that's a fair point and one I hadn't fully considered about Jon. And not just all of Ned's family. It means Jon's grandfather murdered his other grandfather. And that grandfathered was murdered by the man who pushed his cousin out of a window. And that man's sister murdered the man who killed his father. Man, Jon's whole life is an even bigger tangle of death and misery than he already thinks it is. 1 Link to comment
nksarmi August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 Huh - I've actually missed the version that argued somehow Rheagar married Lyanna after his wife died but before Lyanna died, but that might be because I thought Ellia died after R and L (I swear I need to Google a timeline and memorize it) rather than before them. But I have to say that at most, I think Jon is a Targ bastard rather than a Snow. I do think he is super special but to date, in the books and the show - that seems more related to him being Stark (blood of the first men) than Targ. Part of the reason to pay attention to Jon's time with the Wildlings is that they are far more connected to things people in the 7 kingdoms have forgotten (the Others, giants, wargs, etc...) - even those in the North. So it is my belief that IF Jon is the one who has to lead the defeat of the Others (and I think he is) - his time with the Wildlings might prove invaluable to that victory. Plus, I also believe that Jon's time with the Wildlings (what has already happened and what might still be to come if he is resurrected) might change the way he thinks about kings altogether. And if he is one of the leaders who makes it to the end of this story, GRRM might use him to change the system of government in Westerous. I know that isn't necessarily typical of this genre, but he has spent so much time on politics and who should rule, why they should rule, should people bend the knee at all, etc... that I kind of want to see at least the proposal of no one sitting the Iron Throne at all. But in regards to if Jon is really dead - most of us won't believe it until we read it lol. So us not freaking out is really no way to predict what Jon's fate is since we just don't know. I am simply relying on the fact that so much of this story (and even some of the stuff they have included on the show) just doesn't make sense if he isn't resurrected. Needless to say the actor who plays Jon is being majorly stalked right now so that might be the biggest news story you will need to avoid if you are trying to stay spoiler-free for anything you haven't read yet. 2 Link to comment
Delta1212 August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 nksarmi, I thought the same as you, but Lyanna definitely died after the sack of King's Landing and Elia's death because I noticed it said Ned and Robert fought over the dead Targaryen children and only reconciled when Ned came back from the Tower of Joy with news of Lyanna's death. I have no idea where Rhaegar's death falls in relation to the sack, but if he died after Elia, it had to have been pretty tight. I'm not sure he died or that there was time for a marriage before the Trident even if that was the case. 1 Link to comment
Holmbo August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 I agree it really would be nice if GRRM managed to do something more interesting with Jon origin revelation than "you are the chosen one". I do think however it goes it's probably likely that Jon would be very upset by finding out. Having been lied to his whole life like that. And as Shimpy pointed out, being the son of a man he so long considered an enemy. Family is so important in this world, loyalty to your blood. Maybe GRRM could do something interesting with the divided loyalties Jon will feel because of this. 1 Link to comment
stillshimpy August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 (edited) Um, that's some historical stuff pre-Rebellion not sure you would consider it a spoiler (will probably be mentioned in the series in respect to Ser Dontos, I think?) I don't think I've gotten to that point ambi, but it's completely cool, the whole reason it caught my attention is solely because I think Martin draws from a combination of Shakespeare's versions of history/popular tourist history and then actual history. So when you wrote that the Mad King had been imprisoned, I actually thought of "Huh, well I didn't think Aerys was representing Richard II in this....?" and just spent head-time trying to figure out what historical figure Martin might have used for Aerys and parts of it would fit Richard II (not to be confused with Richard III ...history, it's stuffed silly with people that have remarkably similar names). I have no idea when Rhaegar's wife died in relationship to Lyanna, for kind of while we didn't actually know Rhaegar was married, at least it wasn't super clear from the series....so when that was made clear just about ever permutation of "How can Jon still be construed as being the rightful heir?" theory got talked about, so I'd read that one at the time, "What if Elia died before and Rhaegar's last living act was to marry Lyanna??" Thank you for the heads up about paying attention to Jon's time with the Wildlings. Seriously, I appreciate that and it's helpful to know. I will keep my eyes peeled and stop skimming the lengthy descriptions of Ice Walls and cracks therein and what one does when confronted with cracks in ice walls (okay, I admit? That passage was sort of fun, but again, I already knew "He'll be fine" so sometimes foreknowledge isn't the best thing). Again, maybe he is the key to everything and maybe he also finds out that there are worse things than thinking you're nobody, like maybe finding out who you are. ETA: Okay, I actually went back through that chapter and there's no dream about Bran. I did notice that Jon wished he had a tenth of the courage Bran did when he was climbing, but I caught that the first time out. Was there something else I'm missing? Edited August 26, 2015 by stillshimpy 1 Link to comment
nksarmi August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 (edited) nksarmi, I thought the same as you, but Lyanna definitely died after the sack of King's Landing and Elia's death because I noticed it said Ned and Robert fought over the dead Targaryen children and only reconciled when Ned came back from the Tower of Joy with news of Lyanna's death. I have no idea where Rhaegar's death falls in relation to the sack, but if he died after Elia, it had to have been pretty tight. I'm not sure he died or that there was time for a marriage before the Trident even if that was the case. The idea that Elia died before Rhaegar is just so hard to reconcile with the fact that a) the Mountain killed them acting on Tywin's orders and b) the bit about Tywin laying the bodies of the dead children at Robert's feet (not sure if that was show only though). For Tywin - the man who was so wishy, washy that when Aerys opened the gates to him, he thought the Lannisters were coming to help - to be so bold as to kill Elia and her children before Rhaegar was dead just doesn't seem likely. I mean yes, he thought the crown prince was going to marry Cersei at one point and I could see him thinking it was a win/win if Elia and her children died because even if Rhaegar lived, he would need a new wife and Cersei would be available. BUT if that was the case, he would have to have engineered their deaths in such as way that no one would EVER connect it to him and that just simply isn't the case. So yea, even if Lyanna lived for a couple of months after the Trident, it really seems to me that Rhaegar had to be the first true piece of that puzzle to fall. He did die before Jamie killed his father right? That would make sense if Robert and Ned moved from the Trident to King's Landing. So I think it has to be.... Rhaegar dies first at the Trident Jamie kills the Mad King (and Tywin rides in to betray the king rather than defend the city) Tywin's men kill Elia about the same time and lay the children at Robert B's feet Somewhere in here the royal family tries to escape across the narrow sea and Dany is born Robert and Ned fight about the kids and Ned goes to rescue Lyanna and Jon is born I don't really see how Rhaegar could have married Lyanna after Elia's death - but I could see the other possible explanations (like a Westerous divorce). However, I still think Jon is a Targ bastard. But I do think it's important if Elia's kids were killed and layed at Robert B's feet and he and Ned fought about it before Jon's birth because aside from Jon being Ned's last connection to his dead sister - I really do think it would be at the forefront of Ned's mind that Robert, Tywin, or someone else might kill Jon the same as Elia's children. I really think that - and the belief that at least some would call raising a secret Targ treason - has serious weight as to why he wouldn't tell Catelyn the truth. I suspect that Jon was his last link to Lyanna was probably why he couldn't let Jon be raised else ware. ***ETA: If the order of death is as described above (Rhaegar, the Mad King, Elia and her children while the royal family escapes across the narrow sea) that actually does explain at least in part why the freaking King's Guard is there defending Lyanna and her child to the death. I have seen that as the subject of much debate and it certainly doesn't cover why - in the middle of war - they left the actually king in the hands of Jamie (other than they too assumed Lannister loyalty to the crown), but once news reached the Tower of Joy about Rhaegar's death, it was probably accompanied by news of the death of the Mad King and the Lannister betrayal. I mean heck, the royal family is running away in all of this with a very pregnant Queen Mother - it must have been instantly obvious that the Targ's didn't have enough support to reclaim the throne right away and I think the death of Elia and her children must have been part of the news that made them run. That means Lyanna might have been giving birth to the last Targ in Westerous at the Tower of Joy and the last member of the royal family the king's guard could protect. Perhaps there was actually a plan for them to remove the child and put him in hiding before Ned shows up? Edited August 26, 2015 by nksarmi 1 Link to comment
Mya Stone August 26, 2015 Author Share August 26, 2015 I don't think I've gotten to that point ambi, but it's completely cool, the whole reason it caught my attention is solely because I think Martin draws from a combination of Shakespeare's versions of history/popular tourist history and then actual history. So when you wrote that the Mad King had been imprisoned, I actually thought of "Huh, well I didn't think Aerys was representing Richard II in this....?" and just spent head-time trying to figure out what historical figure Martin might have used for Aerys and parts of it would fit Richard II (not to be confused with Richard III ...history, it's stuffed silly with people that have remarkably similar names). I have no idea when Rhaegar's wife died in relationship to Lyanna, for kind of while we didn't actually know Rhaegar was married, at least it wasn't super clear from the series....so when that was made clear just about ever permutation of "How can Jon still be construed as being the rightful heir?" theory got talked about, so I'd read that one at the time, "What if Elia died before and Rhaegar's last living act was to marry Lyanna??" Thank you for the heads up about paying attention to Jon's time with the Wildlings. Seriously, I appreciate that and it's helpful to know. I will keep my eyes peeled and stop skimming the lengthy descriptions of Ice Walls and cracks therein and what one does when confronted with cracks in ice walls (okay, I admit? That passage was sort of fun, but again, I already knew "He'll be fine" so sometimes foreknowledge isn't the best thing). Again, maybe he is the key to everything and maybe he also finds out that there are worse things than thinking you're nobody, like maybe finding out who you are. ETA: Okay, I actually went back through that chapter and there's no dream about Bran. I did notice that Jon wished he had a tenth of the courage Bran did when he was climbing, but I caught that the first time out. Was there something else I'm missing? I think it's the next Jon chapter. He has quite the dream. I really just picked up on all of it this read through - I'm thinking it's because of my newfound respect for the Jon chapters. ;) (I, too, used to float through them. Oops.) Link to comment
nksarmi August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 Oh ok I looked up the next Jon chapter and it is a good one - stuff the show definitely doesn't do justice to. Link to comment
stillshimpy August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 (edited) Okay, keeping in mind that I know the least about all of this out of all of you? Here's my understanding of what went down: Aerys opens the gates of the city to Tywin Lannister and Tywin has essentially issued a "Kill them all and let the gods sort them out" Rains of Castomere, full-scale slaughter, regardless. According to what Jaime tells Brienne, Aerys has told him to kill Tywin Lannister, so there wasn't any "so trusting that he did this" in the Show version. Jaime killed Aerys, who was a full chimney short of a fireplace at that point because Aerys was killing everyone and he'd just ordered Jaime to kill his own father. Jaime is supposed to be all of Sixteen. Enter Ned, who must have been hot on the heels of Tywin.....to find Jaime Lannister on the Throne, and a dead king on the floor....and Robert isn't there yet, because he was busy at the Trident, killing the hell out of Rhaegar Targaryen, because whereas Tywin Lannister had decided it was time for a regime change and was all about grabbing power, Robert really was all about killing the hell out of the guy who stole (either by force or her heart, don't know, pretty much don't care....hope it was by force, personally or else Lyanna really had a nerve asking for anything from Ned, seeing as most of her family is dead over this whole affair) his intended. So Robert was at the Trident or journey from there, having just killed Rhaegar and Ned held King's Landing until Robert caught up with him. I know this land has Ravens, but it's not like there was texting or instant messaging....so I don't know that everyone knew Rhaegar was dead yet? Lannister children were already dead. Robert wasn't as pissed about that as Ned wanted him to be, he was in fact, more of the "good" school of thought (and if Dany's version of history was to be believed, he laughed at their little dead bodies....a nice Targaryen touch by Viserys in his Narrative of Victimization) ....but that Robert actually didn't launch the world's biggest hunt for Viserys and offer a gajillion gold dragons to anyone who could bring him Aerys dead children. That it was just Viserys story and the history Dany learned that they were only ever moments ahead of the "Usurper's Hired Knives" and that that might have been true the night Dany was born....but that for the most part....Robert just had the Targaryen children spied on, rather than issue MurderDeathKill Orders on them. Ned doens't go off in a huff, he goes off in search of Lyanna and trailing the remaining King's Guard....because I don't think it was that Robert was just all "I give up on Lyanna" at that point, but rather someone had to hold King's Landing and Robert trusted Ned to go and find Lyanna....which he did and she was dying. Now that's just a cobbling together of stuff from the show and the books for me thus far, but that Ned was really put off that Robert wasn't more upset that Rhaegar's children and wife were murdered and Robert was more of the "Death to all thing Targ!....and in the spirit of that....go and find Lyanna." But I could just be dead wrong about all of that. Robert's attitude was more "I don't care that these children were murdered" he and Ned fought over it, but that they were still on good enough terms that it was Ned that went off in search of Lyanna....who Robert was still very much obsessed with, so....? Just saying. They had an argument, but Robert-the-Lyanna-Obsessed still let Ned go off to find her (presumably expecting that if she was alive, she'd be returned to him...?) Edited August 26, 2015 by stillshimpy Link to comment
Haleth August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 Sorry, Shimpy, the dream is in the next Jon chapter. They all kind of blend together for me while he's north of the Wall. 2 Link to comment
Delta1212 August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 Well, most of the people who were present are now dead as of book 2, most of the rest don't talk about it very often or in a lot of detail, and so most of what we learn about the Rebellion and its immediate aftermath is from third-hand accounts that frequently conflict with each other either directly or implicitly. Which is realistic, but also makes it hard to pin down exactly what happened with much certainty. 2 Link to comment
nksarmi August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 That's a fascinating tool by the author to have some wiggle room on canon lol. I wonder if we will get a clear understanding of what happened and when, if Jon's parentage is revealed. Link to comment
nksarmi August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 This is an excellent summary of Rober'ts Rebellion but I didn't research all the sources: http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Robert's_Rebellion. If accurate, this makes it clear that Rhaegar is a true ass who really could have ended the war long before his family fell from power and presumably Lyanna could have as well if she wasn't being held prisoner. And I kind of hope she was because she really does look like a jerk if she had free will in all of this. This records the sack of King's Landing as the last part of the battle so that would mean that Rhaegar died first. And it seems to match up with the idea that Tywin waited to side with whoever was going to win. It also definitely states that Elia was killed after Rhaegar so no last minute wedding there. And this timeline also has Dany and her brother escaping well after Robert was crowned but I guess it just wasn't possible for the king's guard to get from Dorne to where the last Targ's were while trying to protect Lyanna. 1 Link to comment
stillshimpy August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 Okay, so how did anyone think I could just skim past Jon being a freaking Warg?? Plus, does he dream of Bran or does he dream of Robb? He smells death and it's dark where he is (the brother in the tree) , but I take it it's Bran? It's just that he's never identified and whereas I know Bran has the dream of the three-eyed crow and opens his psychic eye and is connected to the Weirwood -- there also seemed to be some heavy duty hinting that there was death and decay there (only instead of hinting, they just stated it) . Also, this is about the only time I've ever been just plain-old angry at the show for biffing a characterization so much. Qhorin Halfhand in the series is just this name, more than anything. We're told "Oh he's legendary, he's got half a hand...." and then he gets Jon to kill him and its clearly for a purpose, so you just know "Oh wow, he really was a complete badass" ....and then he's dead. In the book he's actually doing something, if not purposeful, at least having thought it through when he does the "We'll just leave you here to kill the girl, because you know, you seem the sort of guy who will do that no problem...." and off they trudge. No follow-up conversation. No discovery that Qhorin actually understood the likelihood that Jon would be able to kill Ygritte and was just testing him to see what he was made of in the "will he tell me about it?" Also, the show truly struggles with depicting any sort of people who are primitive on any level. Like Iron Islander's are just....you'd fucking, move okay? No one would ever stay there if they could get away from the Iron Islands in the show. They are at least a little less "Wow, I hope nothing vivid ever bursts forth here and burns the hell out of all your retinas, here in the land of 'the only color is the red of blood and the brown of poop....Azure might kill a man dead. And then we rob his body." So I thought the Iron Islanders depiction was bad, but it's nothing compared to the Wildlings who....the only time they ever created an interesting Wildling was that poor woman we called "Fuck Men" ....who loved her kids (mark of freaking death in this show, unless your last name is Lannister and your first name is Cersei) ...and then went to help older people get to boats....so she died immediately. But she was the only impressive Wildling. Also, I pretty much love Rose Leslie from her days on Downton, but until she hesitated to kill Jon for that second that got her killed and spared Gilly, she was the most annoying character in the world because she seemed to want Jon to defect solely so she could do him and then was like the Nightmare of Clingy person-I-dated-who-thinks-we're-now-married-because-we-split-a-danish type. In the book, Jon freaking lets her go so she has reason to trust him (even though she clearly just took off and reported where they were....at least she might be able to construe that as Jon wanting to defect....and all of that seems purposeful on Qhorin's part. So somehow they took some of the best strategy and most badass bravery on the part of the Night's Watch Rangers (because....damn, Squire staying behind to die and just asking that his horse be given an apple just about killed me....the freaking Night's Watch made me cry....what...the....hell?)...and turned it into "The great Unwashed are somehow tricked by a not very convincing fight between Jon and Qhorin that played like -- and I'm being literal here -- an actual scene from Galaxy Quest. The one where Tim Allen's character provokes Alan Rickman's character into hitting him with cheesy dialogue from their former TV show as part of an escape plan. It was laughable. That stuff was heartbreaking. It's also heartbreaking that all this stuff that the Stark children were told as stories...Old Nans stories, are actually the things that keep sort of helping to arm them as they go forth in the world. Like she's the embodiment of the Crone from the gods. Knowing about Skinchangers and Wargs are because of Nan. Also....Mya, a random moment from my household was me, saying aloud, as the eagle got Ghost "Dammit, _______, how could you have not told me Ghost was going to die?!? GOD DAMNIT!" then late..."Oh, okay good. Also, I love Qhorin now." and then I started getting all misty eyed before Squire stayed behind to die, to try and save them all and just wanted his poor old horse to be given his well-earned apple. Oh and I read the "Sansa's a woman now, Cersei behaved like a human being and Stannis burning shit like....whoa..." chapter too. 3 Link to comment
mac123x August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 The World of Ice and Fire book spells out the order of events pretty linearly. I don't know how canonical that book is, but in that timeline, Rhaegar died before Elia. I think the "Jon isn't a bastard because R&L were actually married" theory is premised on Rhaegar being a bigamist like Aegon the Conqueror. In my opinion that doesn't make a great precedent. Aegon was already married to both his wives before he landed in Westeros, and everyone sort of accepted it afterwards because, well, dragons. 2 Link to comment
Delta1212 August 26, 2015 Share August 26, 2015 Yeah, sometimes I forget how much better in pretty much every way the Wall and North of it plotline is in the books. You have no idea (well, now I suppose you do) how ticked about the show's portrayal of the Halfhand many people were. He did kind of go from "wise, badass mentor" to "some guy who screwed up by leaving Jon alone with Ygritte for no apparent reason and then got captured immediately after." 1 Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.