Rogue Posted May 3, 2016 Report Share Posted May 3, 2016 1 hour ago, oldschool said: GRMM has made numerous references to the difference between Jon and the other Stark children. its all there. Why are you so hung up on how the actor's are portrayed on the show? It doesn't make any sense. It's the only reference I have. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldschool Posted May 3, 2016 Report Share Posted May 3, 2016 37 minutes ago, Rogue said: It's the only reference I have. That's your issue. The theory is rooted in the source material, not the TV series. Legaltitan 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamalisms Posted May 3, 2016 Report Share Posted May 3, 2016 The TV series doesn't support the theory independently... but once you've got the theory from the books and realize how subtly hinted it is throughout, then you watch the show and how they bring up Lyanna repeatedly for zero reason - then the show supports the theory. Even little things in the show like watching Little finger's face last year as Sansa said Rhaegar raped Lyanna... the show has been hinting a bit. I don't know that the books ever explicitly state Ned or Lyanna's hair color beyond dark. It's not in the wiki, at least. Some people did reject the theory because of Jon's hair but then GRRM wrote prequels and a history book and seeded them with Targaryens who had dark hair. I don't think that was an accident, especially considering how key hair was in the Baratheon family. I think GRRM realized he needed to clear it up that Targaryens weren't exclusively silver haired. Essentially,in terms of appearance, the theory says Jon looks like his "dad" and Arya according to the books. Arya supposedly looks like Lyanna as well. Jon is definitely a Stark. Hair is part of that because Catelyn thinks about his her own sins have redder hair than Jon... but hair isn't really key to the theory. Jonboy 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starkiller Posted May 3, 2016 Report Share Posted May 3, 2016 1 hour ago, Rogue said: Doesn't that passage say Jon (as well as Arya) looks like his father? But, if not all Targaryen's had the silver/blonde hair, then Jon's hair isn't a big issue to the theory. Thanks It just means Jon looks like a Stark. Which would be odd if Eddard wasn't actually his father... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starkiller Posted May 3, 2016 Report Share Posted May 3, 2016 2 hours ago, Calico said: I always assumed the blonde hair was from incest since Targaryens were known to only sleep with other family members(sister to brother) keeping the bloodline pure while also continuing the blonde hair. Well, certainly incest did keep their looks more consistent. But when children were not a product of incest it was at least more likely that non-Targaryen genes would be dominant. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue Posted May 3, 2016 Report Share Posted May 3, 2016 1 hour ago, Jamalisms said: The TV series doesn't support the theory independently... but once you've got the theory from the books and realize how subtly hinted it is throughout, then you watch the show and how they bring up Lyanna repeatedly for zero reason - then the show supports the theory. Even little things in the show like watching Little finger's face last year as Sansa said Rhaegar raped Lyanna... the show has been hinting a bit. I don't know that the books ever explicitly state Ned or Lyanna's hair color beyond dark. It's not in the wiki, at least. Some people did reject the theory because of Jon's hair but then GRRM wrote prequels and a history book and seeded them with Targaryens who had dark hair. I don't think that was an accident, especially considering how key hair was in the Baratheon family. I think GRRM realized he needed to clear it up that Targaryens weren't exclusively silver haired. Essentially,in terms of appearance, the theory says Jon looks like his "dad" and Arya according to the books. Arya supposedly looks like Lyanna as well. Jon is definitely a Stark. Hair is part of that because Catelyn thinks about his her own sins have redder hair than Jon... but hair isn't really key to the theory. Thank you. A detailed answer. I'm not sure if people felt their knowledge was being challenged, or the theory, and became offended or what. Ego, the great internet space waster. We're all guilty, I guess. I like the theory. I find it very intriguing and even if he never has anything to do with dragons, it is a cool story line. I just hadn't seen if hair was ever brought up and what, if any, conclusion there was. As well thought out the theory was, I figured it had at least been discussed. That you said GRRM even realized he needed to go back and introduce characters with what wasn't the apparent traditional hair color (even in the show hair color has played a role), suggested it was something he felt might be a legitimate concern, and dotted his i's and crossed his t's. Thanks again. Maybe next time we can get here quicker. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue Posted May 3, 2016 Report Share Posted May 3, 2016 2 hours ago, oldschool said: That's your issue. The theory is rooted in the source material, not the TV series. I'll just ask Jamal next time, he seems more knowledgeable. Thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamalisms Posted May 3, 2016 Report Share Posted May 3, 2016 Btw, Jon going to the wall and renouncing all claims to land and title coincides (in book and show) with Ned telling him that they'd finally discuss who his mother was. I don't think that's a coincidence and is as convincing to me as almost anything in the theory. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starkiller Posted May 3, 2016 Report Share Posted May 3, 2016 GRRM didn't need to go back and do anything relating to hair color. It's all in the books. oldschool 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue Posted May 3, 2016 Report Share Posted May 3, 2016 1 hour ago, Starkiller said: It just means Jon looks like a Stark. Which would be odd if Eddard wasn't actually his father... Actually, the theory suggests Ned isn't actually his father. I get your point, but I didn't think Jon didn't have Stark in him. Just curious about the hair. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercalius Posted May 3, 2016 Report Share Posted May 3, 2016 Is Jon Snow "Becky with the good hair?!?!" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OILERMAN Posted May 3, 2016 Author Report Share Posted May 3, 2016 I'm guessing and heard it discussed, since Jon died his oath to the wall is fulfilled Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldschool Posted May 3, 2016 Report Share Posted May 3, 2016 1 hour ago, Rogue said: I'll just ask Jamal next time, he seems more knowledgeable. Thanks. lol, fuck off. Like I said your issue is that you haven't read the books. Thats not my problem. Next time google it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamalisms Posted May 3, 2016 Report Share Posted May 3, 2016 26 minutes ago, OILERMAN said: I'm guessing and heard it discussed, since Jon died his oath to the wall is fulfilled Some people hate this idea but the oath is all about interpretation, just like it was when it came to sex vs take a wife/father a child. The wording can definitely be interpreted as until he dies... which he did... and now he's free. Will Jon interpret it that way? Will his brothers and the realm (King and Lords) who might seek to bring him to justice as an abandoner? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamalisms Posted May 3, 2016 Report Share Posted May 3, 2016 In fact, people with power define the rules. Good guys ignore this and villains abuse it, which is a cheap way authors create surprise and conflict. Robert's will is binding... until Cersei rips it up. Kings Guard serve for life... until Joff says fuck off. Ramsay can't inherit... until the King says he's true born. Only heroes refuse to change the game. Jon could have been washed clean of his vows by Stannis... according to Stannis... but he said no. As Lord Commander he could have officially changed the vows so that he wasn't in breach... especially in the books where he told everyone (paraphrased) 'I'm breaking my vows and going to war. I won't ask you to, however." And then they killed him. Screw that. He should have said "As Lord Commander, I've decreed that this war is part of our charter and any of your shits who don't join are mutineers." If Jon wants to leave, he can and will... and didn't have to die to do so. The Watch is worthless now anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.