Interesting conversation here. There are some good points as well as a few head-scratchers (i.e., why don't they see that everything wrong and cliche about R+L=J would apply just as much to R+L=D).
Be watching it soon.
Darkstar will be the next Vulture King.
Craster has 19 daughters and there are 19 castles on the Wall, coincidence I think not!
Interesting conversation here. There are some good points as well as a few head-scratchers (i.e., why don't they see that everything wrong and cliche about R+L=J would apply just as much to R+L=D).
Be watching it soon.
I was amused by PJ's comment about the first reading of GRRM's novels and then most impressed by his analysis of birthrights. I'd recommend listening to this!
Interesting conversation here. There are some good points as well as a few head-scratchers (i.e., why don't they see that everything wrong and cliche about R+L=J would apply just as much to R+L=D).
That is the question indeed! Not sure when the cliche starts for me; the pairing of Lyanna and Rhaegar at the get go, or with any child they had.
Post by whitewolfstark on Jun 18, 2018 5:51:52 GMT
The problem is we've been living in a post-Baby Boomer writer world for some time now. Baby Boomers with their desire to overturn tropes and subvert them have now gotten people blase' about those tricks Boomers lean heavily on.
R+L=J where Lyanna is running off sounds revolutionary to someone with a 1950s frame of mind... to someone who doesn't have any recollection of the 1950s, it's the usual fare that everyone is tired of.
And then there's the problem of subverting the subversions--which some Boomers do, which only end up reconfirming the old beliefs in birthright and such that the original subversions were designed to undermine in the first place. Thus doing a greater disservice to society IMO in the name of killing boredom than anything else.
I mean, it's a long long staple of writing tropes where the secret heir who's been raised in poor means is marked as being better than his surroundings, because the belief back in the 1700s when that trope was in its heyday relied on the Aristocracy's belief in their inherent superiority by BLOOD to that of the common peasant. Therefore, any character who might possess better morals than their upbringing might suggest, or can naturally pick up skills like leadership or fighting, they're automatically being signaled as part of the aristocracy to the aristocratic readers--who've happened to fall on hard times of some sort, and "their blood will out".
And that's the problem with a lot of R+L=J theories is that they rely on the "blood will out" ideas that re-emerge among that part of the fan base.
And that's the problem with a lot of R+L=J theories is that they rely on the "blood will out" ideas that re-emerge among that part of the fan base.
Your comment reminds me I'm starting to question the true role of TPTWP in the saga. Is it anything more than a cruel mirage, enticing Marwyn, Dany, Quentyn, Aemon and their followers into eventually sterile adventures? Rather like Brienne in her quest for Sansa (currently dancing the night away in the Vale) or Stannis, doomed to starve in the name of 'true' kingship? Just what is this saga about?
And that's the problem with a lot of R+L=J theories is that they rely on the "blood will out" ideas that re-emerge among that part of the fan base.
Your comment reminds me I'm starting to question the true role of TPTWP in the saga. Is it anything more than a cruel mirage, enticing Marwyn, Dany, Quentyn, Aemon and their followers into eventually sterile adventures? Rather like Brienne in her quest for Sansa (currently dancing the night away in the Vale) or Stannis, doomed to starve in the name of 'true' kingship? Just what is this saga about?
It's an anti-Fantasy Fantasy story. I.E. It's an Irony Story, not a Romance, per Northrop Frye. Your standard fantasy would be Romance:
The romance is nearest of all literary forms to the wish-fulfilment dream, and for that reason it has socially a curiously paradoxical role. In every age the ruling social or intellectual class tends to project its ideals in some form of romance, where the virtuous heroes and beautiful heroines represent the ideals and the villains the threats to their ascendancy. This is the general character of chivalric romance in the Middle Ages, aristocratic romance in the Renaissance, bourgeois romance since the eighteenth century, and revolutionary romance in contemporary Russia. Yet there is a genuinely "proletarian" element in romance too which is never satisfied with its various incarnations, and in fact the incarnations themselves indicate that no matter how great a change may take place in society, romance will turn up again, as hungry as ever, looking for new hopes and desires to feed on. The perennially child like quality of romance is marked by its extraordinarily persistent nostalgia, its search for some kind of imaginative golden age in time or space. There has never to my knowledge been any period of Gothic English literature, but the list of Gothic revivalists stretches completely across its entire history, from the Beowulf poet to writers of our own day.
But GRRM, like Cervantes, is focused on the stuff Romance never focuses on:
We come now to the mythical patterns of experience, the attempts to give form to the shifting ambiguities and complexities of unidealized existence. We cannot find these patterns merely in the mimetic or representational aspect of such literature, for that aspect is one of content and not form. As structure, the central principle of ironic myth is best approached as a parody of romance: the application of romantic mythical forms to a more realistic content which fits them in unexpected ways. No one in a romance, Don Quixote protests, ever asks who pays for the hero's accommodation.
But GRRM, like Cervantes, is focused on the stuff Romance never focuses on
Oh, this could be the beginning of a lot of fun tracing Cervantine influences on GRRM. Also a great excuse to indulge in the wines of La Mancha whilst reading the saga!
The problem is we've been living in a post-Baby Boomer writer world for some time now. Baby Boomers with their desire to overturn tropes and subvert them have now gotten people blase' about those tricks Boomers lean heavily on.
R+L=J where Lyanna is running off sounds revolutionary to someone with a 1950s frame of mind... to someone who doesn't have any recollection of the 1950s, it's the usual fare that everyone is tired of.
Great points. One must always factor in their own frame of reference.
And then there's the problem of subverting the subversions--which some Boomers do, which only end up reconfirming the old beliefs in birthright and such that the original subversions were designed to undermine in the first place. Thus doing a greater disservice to society IMO in the name of killing boredom than anything else.
True, but I think I might disagree with you here, if I understand you correctly.
Rather than inadvertently reinforce the bias the original subversion was meant to subvert, I think Jon Snow is GRRM's way of making us accept people frowned upon by the gods...
I mean, it's a long long staple of writing tropes where the secret heir who's been raised in poor means is marked as being better than his surroundings, because the belief back in the 1700s when that trope was in its heyday relied on the Aristocracy's belief in their inherent superiority by BLOOD to that of the common peasant. Therefore, any character who might possess better morals than their upbringing might suggest, or can naturally pick up skills like leadership or fighting, they're automatically being signaled as part of the aristocracy to the aristocratic readers--who've happened to fall on hard times of some sort, and "their blood will out".
Yup. And if there is one common thread throughout GRRM's extant works of literature, it must be the antithesis of this trope.
In the GRRMarillion, the aristocrats repeatedly make life worse for the common man. The virtues of the ruling class tend to rupture like so many tendons of Achilles.
The flaws of man, and strengths of woman, will out. And I think this will prove to be particularly true in the revelation of Jon's parentage.
That is the question indeed! Not sure when the cliche starts for me; the pairing of Lyanna and Rhaegar at the get go, or with any child they had.
It can definitely be either. LOL
But for me the cliche definitely starts at the child. The pairing itself is less cliche for me, and more "WTF-this-gossip-doesn't-fit-Rhaegar-or-Lyanna's-modus-operandi!"
But GRRM, like Cervantes, is focused on the stuff Romance never focuses on
Oh, this could be the beginning of a lot of fun tracing Cervantine influences on GRRM. Also a great excuse to indulge in the wines of La Mancha whilst reading the saga!
Well, it's not just Cervantes, it's the whole modern era of writing fiction. We've gotten to the point in Western Civilization where we can no longer take our current foundational myth seriously anymore. And as such our entire society is just awash in a sea of Irony and has been for a while (since the end of WWII, to be perfectly honest, though the cracks were appearing before then as well around the time WWI was happening) and the only way we can take it seriously is to either put it in the context of an otherwordly fantasy setting or some other genre fiction setting (Sci-Fi, Mystery, etc). Cervantes was the early outlier beginning of this decline of taking the foundational myth seriously, but he more an expression of the greater problem Western Civilization has at the moment.
Something similar was happening with Western Civilization in the centuries leading up to the birth of Christ, and it ties into Frye's larger theory of Mimetic Literature which is a separate essay from the one I've quoted, but it essentially follows that there's generally 5 periods of literature that last for a few centuries before being supplanted by an even more ironic form until you get to bare naked irony. Well, really it's 4 stages with one of the stages split in half. Frye says you can determine the different stages from one another by seeing where your protagonist was born in relation to society. He gives the preface that you can't really construct a full cycle as the stages he's looking at take place over millennia and evolve so slowly and particularly that saying it's something nailed down is a little much. That said, you can construct something approaching these different stages across a Classical Literature and Christian Literature (using the Grecco-Roman pantheon as one cycle to examine, and the Christianized Western culture as the basis for another cycle).
Myth Stage - stories about gods (Classical) or stories about God & associated Saints (Christian) -- though this stage is one where you have competing myths vying for dominance after the previous cycle has collapsed, Christianity was in no way assured it would "win" as it had competition with the Germanic/Norse pantheon for example
Heroic Stage - stories about heroic demi-gods who found city states (Classical) or stories about chivalric warrior knights, think King Arthur & the Knights of the Round Table (Christian) -- this stage is different from the Mimetic stage as often divine intervention is considered possible and occurs frequently.
Mimetic Stage (is split into the High Mimetic and Low Mimetic)
High Mimetic - stories about the Upper/Ruling Classes (Classical) or stories about the Princely/Ruling Classes (Christian) -- as opposed to Arthurian legend, think instead of Shakespeare, Cervantes, Moliere, Machiavelli
Low Mimetic - stories about the Middle/Lower Classes -- think plays about wealthy farmers being tricked out of their daughters (Classical) or stories about the Bourgeoisie/Middle Class/Working Class (Christian) -- think Henry Fielding, Jane Austen, Charles Dickens
Ironic Stage - stories about characters that are beneath the reader's contempt, someone to be looked down upon and either mocked or derided; stories about slaves (Classical) or think Kafka's Metamorphosis, where his protagonist transforms into the bug his family and the society he lives in treats him as (Christian) but you could also through Dystopian literature like Huxley's Brave New World or Orwell's 1984 here as well as really kicking off this stage in earnest, both attacking the Mimetic stage's beliefs in earnest.
And GRRM and his popularity would be an indication that the population can now not even take genre fiction seriously anymore... which means we're running out of ways to extend the central myth. Genre fiction was the salvation of post-war Western Civilization after the twin disasters of the Holocaust and the Nuclear Bomb both undercut Western Civilization's belief in that progress and a better future lay ahead in the future. But increasingly Irony has begun infecting genre fiction, destroying it from the inside out...
Or to put it another way most people would understand instantly: The Nothing (irony) is destroying Fantasia, Bastian... save us!
voice, tagged you instead of quoting you; new computer so I haven't connected the mouse yet, and as I really really suck at using the touchpad I didn't manage to quick quote...
I think the way I got into the story affects this for me; I soon forgot the question of who Jon's mother is/was watching the show, and when the "reveal" came I just reacted "Oh, ok." No feeling at all really, as it was just so many stories I've heard throughout my life. When I found out that this was supposed to be shocking, it was that statement I found shocking as a story like this is done to death for me. And I haven't even read much fantasy! So it's the go-to cliche in my mind. That being said, I agree with your latter statement; so many things doesn't add up with a pairing of those two!
P.S. Hope to see more of you during the summer, missed having you here!
voice, tagged you instead of quoting you; new computer so I haven't connected the mouse yet, and as I really really suck at using the touchpad I didn't manage to quick quote...
I think the way I got into the story affects this for me; I soon forgot the question of who Jon's mother is/was watching the show, and when the "reveal" came I just reacted "Oh, ok." No feeling at all really, as it was just so many stories I've heard throughout my life. When I found out that this was supposed to be shocking, it was that statement I found shocking as a story like this is done to death for me. And I haven't even read much fantasy! So it's the go-to cliche in my mind.
It really is. And yes, the show's rehashing of it was pretty lame for most book readers I think. The unsullied/"shownly" fans were surprised and wowed. But that group is easily impressed.
GRRM sought to fool a person like his mother, who often figured out plot twists before they were revealed. He is also a well-read student of Fantasy and Sci-Fi literature.
RLJ is more obvious than Aragorn in LotR. Fans of RLJ tend to be impressed by such revelations and relatively new to Fantasy Literature. wolfmaid7 and other old Heretics will recall my student surveys.
I regularly recommended asoiaf to students and surveyed their impressions in regards to Jon's parentage. Those who were avid readers of Fantasy saw RLJ leap of the page immediately.
Even if they couldn't remember Rhaegar's name, they remembered that Lyanna was abducted by a prince and this led them to the idea that Jon might be his son.
Those who were not avid Fantasy readers, like myself, didn't usually see it as an issue... but even then there were exceptions. Some said they thought his mother must be noble, and that he would end up being Lord of Winterfell, or King in the North.
The bottom line is that we are surrounded by stories that train us to expect a savior to be hidden in plain sight. A carpenter's son that is really the son of god himself. A strange traveler that is really the rightful king. An orphan that is really a Jedi.
And hidden heirs are as common in Fantasy Literature as magic itself. Either GRRM decided to add one more bit of fluff to that pile, or he didn't.
And here I thought I was starting to get the hang of it, when a hashtag fooked things up for me... Firstworldproblems indeed! Note to self: install mouse tomorrow!
It really is. And yes, the show's rehashing of it was pretty lame for most book readers I think. The unsullied/"shownly" fans were surprised and wowed. But that group is easily impressed.
GRRM sought to fool a person like his mother, who often figured out plot twists before they were revealed. He is also a well-read student of Fantasy and Sci-Fi literature.
RLJ is more obvious than Aragorn in LotR. Fans of RLJ tend to be impressed by such revelations and relatively new to Fantasy Literature. wolfmaid7 and other old Heretics will recall my student surveys.
I regularly recommended asoiaf to students and surveyed their impressions in regards to Jon's parentage. Those who were avid readers of Fantasy saw RLJ leap of the page immediately.
Even if they couldn't remember Rhaegar's name, they remembered that Lyanna was abducted by a prince and this led them to the idea that Jon might be his son.
Those who were not avid Fantasy readers, like myself, didn't usually see it as an issue... but even then there were exceptions. Some said they thought his mother must be noble, and that he would end up being Lord of Winterfell, or King in the North.
The bottom line is that we are surrounded by stories that train us to expect a savior to be hidden in plain sight. A carpenter's son that is really the son of god himself. A strange traveler that is really the rightful king. An orphan that is really a Jedi.
And hidden heirs are as common in Fantasy Literature as magic itself. Either GRRM decided to add one more bit of fluff to that pile, or he didn't.
Haha, I can relate to his mother! Have given up crime novels for one. You wrote on some of those surveys somewhere, and they were interesting! Our minds are indeed trained to think in a certain way. As said, fantasy hasn't been one of my genres, but the same tale is used in sooooo many kinds of stories and so is easy to pick up for avid readers and/or watchers of both movies and tv.
I do try to take the Martin-is-a-trope-breaker-view out of my mind, at least in our reread, but it's hard I have to admit.
Been mulling that over for some time now while working on my Eddard IX breakdown. And the chapters before where we get more information on Lyanna in particular. I have a really hard time seeing them!
And here I thought I was starting to get the hang of it, when a hashtag fooked things up for me... Firstworldproblems indeed! Note to self: install mouse tomorrow!
Don't be too hard on yourself. The hashtags are not exactly user-friendly. LOL
In order to make them work you have to type the number/hash/pound-sign in brackets. Example:
[number-sign]Benjen gives you [HASH]Benjen when you replace "number-sign" with "#".
It was a pain in the arse to install the hashtag feature back in the day, and to make the hashtags work like search results, so I like to use them for the heck of it now and then.
Haha, I can relate to his mother! Have given up crime novels for one. You wrote on some of those surveys somewhere, and they were interesting! Our minds are indeed trained to think in a certain way. As said, fantasy hasn't been one of my genres, but the same tale is used in sooooo many kinds of stories and so is easy to pick up for avid readers and/or watchers of both movies and tv.
I do try to take the Martin-is-a-trope-breaker-view out of my mind, at least in our reread, but it's hard I have to admit.
If it were subtle, that would at least be something.
But it is literally the first story about Rhaegar and Lyanna we are ever told.
Then, rather than reinforce that narrative with details, GRRM undermines it with character development: Rhaegar being dutiful rather than lecherous, Lyanna being pro-monogamy and anti-infidelity, etc.
Been mulling that over for some time now while working on my Eddard IX breakdown. And the chapters before where we get more information on Lyanna in particular. I have a really hard time seeing them!
Word. And that touches upon the thing I find the most offensive about RLJ: it removes all of Lyanna's agency and convictions, and treats her as nothing more than a uterus.
It's like, "Hey! Read A Song for Lya. Then tell me how Lyanna chose a man over her own convictions."
"I can see it. You have more of the north in you than your brothers."
Don't be too hard on yourself. The hashtags are not exactly user-friendly. LOL
In order to make them work you have to type the number/hash/pound-sign in brackets. Example:
[number-sign]Benjen gives you [a class="hashtag" href="/search/results?what_exact_phrase=[HASH]Benjen&who_only_made_by=0&display_as=0"]#Benjen
[/a] when you replace "number-sign" with "#".
It was a pain in the arse to install the hashtag feature back in the day, and to make the hashtags work like search results, so I like to use them for the heck of it now and then. [/quote]
I definitely blame the touchpad here! It just doesn't want to do those hashtags properly! Without it, it works ok. That doesn't mean I could use some practice on the pad, I never had the patience to learn it properly before.
I do like the feature, though! Even if I'm not the one to use it most.
If it were subtle, that would at least be something.
But it is literally the first story about Rhaegar and Lyanna we are ever told.
Then, rather than reinforce that narrative with details, GRRM undermines it with character development: Rhaegar being dutiful rather than lecherous, Lyanna being pro-monogamy and anti-infidelity, etc.
Yep, it's given from the start. With all the other hints and clues to Rhaegar being up to something, and then he just goes "Oh, wolf maid! Divorce!" and tosses it all aside... Even if the dutiful part is overstated, it doesn't fit! Same with Lyanna; "Robert will never keep to one bed" then "Oh, singing dragon prince! Let's go!" At a stretch I can see Lyanna having a laps, due to her age, but that is stretched very very thin!
Relistening to The Rouge Prince and The Princess and the Queen not long ago, we do get a similar dilemma in the rumors on Rhaenyra and Criston. The suggestion that he wanted to take off with her, and she points out that this would render all future vows from him questionable. Same thing goes for Rhaegar here, imo. If he's willing to set aside one wife for a girl he barely knows, how long until he dumps her as well for someone new? From the POV of a girl concerned with fidelity, I don't think that's a good sign...
Word. And that touches upon the thing I find the most offensive about RLJ: it removes all of Lyanna's agency and convictions, and treats her as nothing more than a uterus.
It's like, "Hey! Read A Song for Lya. Then tell me how Lyanna chose a man over her own convictions."