#anyway Jonnel and Sansa Stark

[babybells123]

There is something so beautifully anvilicious about these quotes;

" I am a bastard too now, just like him. Oh, it would be so sweet, to see him once again. But of course that could never be. Alayne Stone had no brothers, baseborn or otherwise." (AFFC, Alayne II)

"The dream was sweet . . . but Winterfell would never be his to show. It belonged to his brother, the King in the North. He was a Snow, not a Stark. Bastard, oathbreaker, and turncloak . . ." (ASOS, Jon V)

Both Jon and Sansa are yearning for Winterfell and the feelings/memories/family associated -but both are intrinsically restricting themselves based off of their bastard status. The notion of Sansa being the only Stark (and character) to transition from a high-born noble lady to a baseborn bastard cannot be overlooked. (And then of course, the notion of Jon being the only Stark (and character) to transition from baseborn bastard to lord commander, cannot be overlooked.) Jon has risen to the top whilst Sansa has lowered to the bottom.

She (GRRM) makes the comparison to Jon herself, meaning that GRRM makes the comparison himself. this isn't something interpreted by fans - it is right there, explicitly within the text.

Sansa's desire to reunite with Jon is "sweet," it'd be almost like a dream come true. Jon's "dream was sweet" as well. But "Winterfell could never be his" and seeing her brother once again "of course, could never be" (possible).

And then later on in the text, Jon is offered the chance to become Jon Stark, and have Winterfell in name. Thus his decidedly unsubtle desire (that he dismisses as an entirely impossible dream) is fulfilled by Stannis' offer, even though he eventually rejects it in truth "Winterfell belongs to my sister Sansa."

There is also the quote that precedes Jon's "sweet dream," where he fantasises about a beautiful little romance with Ygritte; showing her a flower from the glass gardens, feasting her in the great hall, bathing in the hot pools, and loving beneath the heart tree. This dream is directly connected to Winterfell and is obviously sexually + romantically charged.

So whilst Jon's desire is partially fulfilled (even if he doesn't accept it) can we possibly assume that Sansa's simultaneously unsubtle "that could never be" may also be fulfilled? Since GRRM seems to really be beating us over the head with how 'that could never happen' from Sansa's internal monologue "no one will ever marry me for love" is reiterated multiple times (just you wait sweet one!) and Sansa desiring to reunite with her brother who she has modelled her bastardry after, who is supposedly the only brother left to her, is immediately dismissed by Sansa because she's accepted the fact that she'll never be with her family again, (and that she shall never encounter true love).

The connections only keep connecting!

So to summarise:

Jon & Sansa both have "sweet" dreams/desires that connect to Winterfell/family.

Jon's dream is sexually/romantically charged, involves a red-headed girl, and establishes Jon's suppressed desires as actually romantic.

Both Jon and Sansa are bastards in these contexts.

Both Jon and Sansa woefully dismiss these dreams/desires as impossible as "that could never be" and "it could never be his to show."

Jon's desire however is later offered on a silver platter by Stannis Baratheon, to which he mulls over and states that he "has always wanted it" (to be his). Though he later refuses Stannis' offer on the basis that "Winterfell belongs to Sansa" - twice over he says this.

Jon 'giving' Winterfell to Sansa is in direct contrast to Robb (Sansa's image of an honourably idealistic older brother) flat out rejecting Sansa's claim on the basis of her marriage to Tyrion.

Jon thus establishes himself as the only character who respects and protects Sansa's claim. Who does not abuse or exploit it. (Even though he was given the opportunity for it and it's been his innermost desire since childhood.)

In a way, this further conveys Jon as Sansa's unspoken, subconscious hero who is protecting her interests and instilling all those heroic ideals (such as the Janos Slynt situation) - though she does not realise it and has accepted that "there are no heroes" at all. But Jon is the true hero, hiding in plain sight.

So, whilst Sansa believes there are no heroes, Jon fulfils those ideals. Whilst Sansa believes no one will marry her for love, Jon exists as the embodiment of all the chivalric, romantic ideals that she's so desperately wanted.

Can we now assume that Sansa believing that she will essentially never see Jon again as entirely anvilicious as she will in fact see Jon again?

GEORGE I'M IN YOUR WALLS.

[horizon-verizon]

 In the North, Serena Stark had been wed to her half-uncle, Edric, while her sister Sansa Stark had been wed to her half-uncle Jonnel Stark.

The marriage of step-relations is a contentious issue in Westeros. When Lyonel Hightower announced his intention to marry his stepmother, Samantha Hightower, the High Septon forbade the union and deemed it a form of incest. However, Lord Hightower kept Lady Sam as his paramour for thirteen years, fathering six children on her, until the subsequent High Septon reversed his predecessor's decision and allowed the couple to marry. - asoiafwiki.

This is fine, but Rhaenyra marrying her uncle is not okay🙄

Anon is using the wiki entires on Incest from the older fan wiki for AWoIaF.

I think that people want the incest to stop...but they already know that it never does when you reach Dany's place in the timeline/current day and they continue to watch/read from the franchise anyway. I'm not sure why they expect me to care when they have also paid the price of being a part of this cabal, other than they wish to feel like they are doing right...for people that do not exist and as if humanity is just a paper sponge that soaks in values from books as if they are also not accountable of what they make of it to justify doing some stuff w/in said world, like incest. IDK.

[goodqueenaly]

I apologize if this is a question you've already answered. Your posts about the "She-Wolves of Winterfell" are really interesting and that's an ASOIAF historical story I find really interesting. For some reason I had thought that Serena was older than Sansa, but apparently not. I am probably missing something obvious, but was wondering if you have any theories about Serena marrying Edric rather than Barthogan or Brandon? I know that Sansa and Serena were deliberately prevented from ruling Winterfell in their own right, but it seemed like a deliberate effort to exclude them even from being the line that the ruling Starks descend from? I feel like I'm maybe off the mark though?

For one, there seems to be some lack of clarity, at least for now, on the birth order of Rickon Stark's daughters. While TWOIAF's Stark family tree lists Serena as the elder sister and Sansa as the younger, Elio Garcia made a comment on Discord (reproduced on the Westeros.org forums) that per GRRM's own notes, Sansa was the elder and Serena the younger. This would not be the first time later volumes edited or changed established dynastic details, of course - indeed, F&B eliminated one of Jaehaerys and Alysanne's sons, introduced a new daughter, and reshuffled the birth order of their other children - and so I will not at all be surprised if, say, whatever "The She-Wolves of Winterfell" ends up being called confirms that Sansa was really the elder of the two daughters of Rickon.

Anyway, the marriages of Rickon's daughters are a largely (as yet) unexplained but very intriguing detail in the history of the Stark family. If Sansa really were the elder (and assuming that the birth order of Cregan's sons by Lynara will not change), then theirs would have been the marriage of the most senior male-line descendant of Cregan and the eldest surviving son of Cregan, a powerful combination of dynastic claims. Did Cregan and/or anyone else involved in making the marriage arrange just such a match because he (or, again, anyone else involved) envisioned Sansa and Jonnel as ruling as joint lord and lady, rather than one spouse subservient to the other? Did whoever arranged this match want to subsume Sansa's claim into Jonnel's - keeping her as only the future Lord Jonnel's consort rather than allowing her to press forward her own claim (with her own aristocratic husband, perhaps, to back her)? Or just the opposite - did the architect(s) of this union believe that Sansa should be the ruling Lady of Winterfell someday and wish to prevent Cregan's eldest surviving son from challenging her claim to the high seat of the Starks? Any or none of the above might have been the explanation for the marriage, but until and unless we learn more about the times and players involved, these and many other questions remain outstanding (and really, I could probably think of a thousand more possibilities of what any of the individuals involved might have been thinking, but that's a deep rabbit hole for as yet so little information).

As for Serena and Edric, their marriage is even more vague and subject to speculation. To cite Elio Gracia again, he asserts that Serena was first married to Jon Umber and then to Edric Stark. There is no telling when either of these marriages (much less specifically the one with Edric) occurred, and still less what might have driven such a union. Perhaps their marriage was an attempt to breed Rickon's line back into the ruling Stark dynasty, with Jonnel have no son by either Sansa or his second wife, Robyn Ryswell; as Edric would be Jonnel's heir presumptive for lack of (male) issue on the latter's part, maybe Serena was encouraged/arranged/forced to marry Edric in order to consolidate potentially warring claims into a dynastically suitable (and, again, presumably male) child. Perhaps it was an attempt by Edric to assert himself and/or his wife against elder brother Jonnel (especially if Sansa had already died), by claiming that Serena was the rightful heiress to Winterfell and Jonnel a usurper. Perhaps it arose from reluctance to have Serena marrying a non-Stark northern aristocrat and making a play for Winterfell against Cregan's sons. Perhaps it was genuinely a love match (especially since we have no sense of the relative ages of Cregan's sons and Rickon's daughters, making it entirely possible for them to have been of an age and raised together). Again, any or none of these suggestions might provide any explanation - we'll just have to wait for whatever "The She-Wolves of Winterfell" ends up being called, Fire and Blood Volume 2, and/or maybe details hinted at in TWOW (especially to the extent the Stark reunion at Winterfell was supposed to parallel or echo the events of "The She-Wolves of Winterfell").

[esther-dot]

Concerning the books, apart from text suggesting both want to rebuild Winterfell, have a family and parallels in their journey, why do you think Jonsa will be book endgame?

Jon may be Sansa's type... But Sansa isn't his type. There's also the doubt whether Jon can get attracted to a girl who he saw as his sister plus also resembles his step-mother who loathed him. Ygritte had red hair and blue eyes but she reminded Jon of Arya, not Sansa. Also, he doesn't like ladylike women. Jon has already said that WF belongs to Sansa, so I don't see how they will have to marry because of politics(and if it comes out that he's Rhaegar's son, no one will support his claim and Sansa will be chosen anyway, in a scenario where Rickon dies).

If we consider Jonnel Stark/Sansa 1 parallels we will also have to think of Jonnel's brother Brandon Stark marrying Alys Karstark, which can't happen as Alys is married already.

You seem very calm and rational about this, so I don’t mind chatting about it with you, but I have to take a moment to enjoy the argument that Jonsa won’t happen because proper little Sansa can totally fall in love with her “brother” but what strains credulity is that a Targaryen could ever love his sister.

Anyway, in my opinion, the reason Jonsa will happen in the books is that Martin created his characters to say specific things, and regardless of how readers react to or interpret them, they will have certain endgames as a result. So, Sansa gets a romance (as uncomfortable as it makes us due to her age) because Sansa is not merely the character who believed in the songs, believed in love, but because Martin is talking about ideas of innocence and corruption, faith and disillusionment in her chapters, in her arc, and to answer his own questions, to affirm his own beliefs, Martin will answer Sansa’s, he will affirm Sansa’s. The point isn’t to give Sansa a hero simply because she wants one or I want her to have one, the point is much bigger than Sansa. It is the author who wants to believe in heroes, but how can he, or we, as adults who have lived and suffered, who have seen corruption and wars and endured personal wrongs and tragedies hold onto that? How can we have that hope when for most of us, growing up has taught us cynicism? I think these are things the author is talking about with Sansa, and the point isn’t that she (we) should accept that the monsters win or that life isn’t beautiful, or that all the good we believed before we knew better was a lie, the truth is simply more complicated, more painful. Life is harder than we understand when young, brutal even, but the good is still there.

That’s where the lines about songs, that famous line especially, come into Sansa’s story over and over:

This is an idea that Martin is tracking across the series, and as horrible as things get for Sansa at different times, the story she is in, the story the author created, very much believes in heroes.

Jonsas get shit for pointing it out, but we have already seen Slynt beheaded ie the monsters don’t win in the end and wishes come true. Martin has already indicated that in spite of Sansa being surrounded by monsters for so much of her story, there are heroes, and one hero has already fulfilled her wish, almost a continent away. I understand that some fans find it obnoxious that the beautiful princess might get a hero, but if you put aside personal opinions about Sansa, I think you can understand why it’s inevitable that she will meet and be loved by her hero (the one the author already indicated, Jon) because the songs are not lies. Sure, the details may be inaccurate, the truth is far more complicated, but love and heroism, the things they celebrate are true. We all already know that there are true knights (Brienne), so we know Martin purposely writes all the negatives with one bright spot to say he does believe in these things, in spite of all the reasons not to. Sansa doesn’t know Brienne, she doesn’t know Jon chopped off Slynt’s head, but we know it. The author told us to keep hope. Now, the next thing that Sansa has lost hope for is someone marrying her for love, and if heroes exist, if true knights exist, what do you think the logical conclusion is? What do you think the author will do to tell his readers, this is the world I want to believe in. What do you think the author will do to tell the reader, I’m not mocking hope, I am not mocking the innocent, I am not LF telling my victims to resign themselves to cruelty? I think the author will say life is painful, but hope is beautiful and love matters.

Now, obviously, heroes rescuing maidens and all that fairytale stuff the fandom likes to pooh pooh when it comes to Sansa or Jonsa theories comes up in some ways in other character’s POVs, but what’s funny is that, it’s still associated with Sansa:

In fact, Theon, the character Martin singled out as a foil to Jon, is the only other POV in which we get that famous line “life is not a song”

and shockingly (or not so shockingly) that happens right before Theon is the hero, Theon tries to rescue the girl,

The author couldn’t be any clearer in his “the character might not believe, but I am showing the readers that they’re wrong” schtick. To me, Sansa’s “no one will marry me for love” falls into that category. She loses hope, the author will restore it.

This is getting long, but I’ll still say a little about my boy. The fandom has a weird amnesia when it comes to a major revelation about Jon that is meant to impact how we view him.

I have no idea where the “Jon doesn’t like ladies” talking point comes from when we have this quote in addition to his dreams of children, his desire to recreate his childhood. Jon wants the life that Ned had, that Robb was destined for, and he has lived with intense guilt and shame over that desire. You and I know that the picture in Jon’s mind, the dream that he thinks he will never have, the life he wants more than anything includes a lady wife.

There are things about Ygritte that remind Jon of Arya, but if you read the thing that specifically makes him attracted to her, makes him want her…

The things that Jon finds attractive aren’t what remind him of Arya, and in fact, are the more ladylike aspects of Ygritte’s personality, the quiet moments, not her interest in fighting, but her singing. And if that isn’t enough, Jon’s fantasy is to enact Lord/Lady of Winterfell with her:

I know Ygritte is a fan favorite, but Jon resists her advances as long as he can, eventually has sex with her all the while thinking if he doesn’t he would die, and while I think he genuinely comes to care for her, he also feels like fucking her as the FF do makes him no different than an animal. None of this indicates to the reader that this is what he wants because that sexual relationship wasn’t by choice, but we do have glimpses of what he likes, and then the admission of what he wants most, and I’m not sure why the fandom ignores that. Just because Jon is a softy who sees the good and bad in people doesn’t mean we’re meant to ignore Jon’s dreams. As a Jon fan, it bugs me that whitewashing Ygritte takes precedence over my boy’s feelings.

As for the Jonnel/Sansa thing (link), I don’t think the idea is that every ancestor is foreshadowing for their namesakes. The reason this couple raises eyebrows is because Martin went back and deliberately added them as that post explains. And with the factors he included in that scenario (link), it feels like a very self aware attempt to foreshadow canon, only this time, because of Robb’s will and the dire circumstances the North will be (the Others, Dany invading etc) Jon(nel) marrying Sansa might be in an effort to restore her rights, give Winterfell back to her, rather than take it. I’m more a fan of the secret marriage in the godswood even though she’s still technically married to Tyrion idea (because that’s young and dramatic), but the Jonnel/Sansa deal…there’s a lot of reasons to think that’s foreshadowing for a “political” marriage that is strangely, very acceptable to the kids. The biggest one being, Martin does have to resolve the issue of men marrying women for their claims/to usurp their power and that isn’t resolved by the idea of Sansa someday marrying some nobody. She has to marry someone we know loves her to resolve that issue. And luckily for us, we know a dude who could have usurped her and didn’t, and who will again be offered the chance to take Winterfell which might result in him refusing again or the positive version of the Jonnel/Sansa situation, marriage to empower Sansa, rather than take from her. Considering that’s what Jon arranged for Alys…there’s something there. I would like the Northern Lords to support Sansa’s claim, but it’s all dependent on who shows up when, what happens with Robb’s will, when Jon’s parentage is revealed, when Rickon and Bran appear…I think it’s far from certain that Sansa is QitN in her own right, my preferences aside. ☹️

So for me, it mainly comes down to what Martin is saying and there are many paths to get there, but the end result would be love affirming. Basically, if Sansa loses hope and says there are no true knights and Martin says there is, if she thinks there are no heroes and Martin says there is, if she thinks no one will marry her for love, I have no choice but to believe someone will.

[jackoshadows]

Not a question, just a little rant: I don't understand why Jonsa fans rely so heavily on the Jonnel/Sansa pairing from the Stark lineage. Jonnel had a troublesome rule to the point where the people of the North lamented his brother Rickon's death, and his marriage to Sansa had no issue. Sansa also *died*. He married someone else afterward. Is that their king lol? Do they just see similar names and think "this is foreshadowing for Jonsa"?

Do they just see similar names and think "this is foreshadowing for Jonsa"?

Yes, that how it works in a Jonsa meta. For example, anytime it snows in Sansa chapters it is Jonsa foreshadowing ....

There's nothing in the pages of the books themselves for this ship, so they make stuff up using the asoiaf history books.

Think of how ridiculous this - Jon/Sansa is the central romance of the series and GRRM is writing this all important central romance in the family trees put up in world books/Fire and blood/asoiaf comic books etc and not in the main 5 asoiaf books themselves....

Honestly, there are days when I think that Jonsa shippers are actually trolls, trolling the fandom at our expense and secretly laughing about it - because there's no way they really believe some of the hogwash they are selling.

On other days, I am just utterly baffled and amazed that these people really believe that Jon and Sansa is going to happen and that in the next book Sansa is going North on a horse in the winter storms we saw described in ADwD, and that Ramsay is going to chase her with his hounds and Jon in Ghost will rescue her and all that swill.

They don't even understand basic how storytelling works. There should be stuff on the pages in order to tell a particular story. If Jon and Sansa not getting along in the beginning and then falling in love is the story - then GRRM would put that on the page. We would read Jon thinking about how he and Sansa didn't speak or that time they met and Sansa was mean to him or hurt memories of Sansa treating him like a bastard. But we get nothing.

Jonsa shippers love to talk about how Jon is not really angry at Sansa or thinks ill of her and therefore Sansa was not mean to him in anyway. They point to Jon  being more angry at Robb than Sansa.

Here’s the thing, if I was a Jonsa shipper, I would want Sansa to be mean to him and for Jon to keep thinking back on how Sansa was mean to him, I would want Jon to get angry at Sansa’s treatment, anger means emotion and emotions are necessary to connect characters. If we got that on page, then maybe I would have considered the possibility - the romance/love story has to start from somewhere, from something. But in this case we get nothing - just blank paper.

Remember how Jon beat a guy and nearly took his head off during training because he remembered Robb calling him a bastard and telling him he would never be Lord of Winterfell? That’s some heavy emotion involved. That’s love. Someone he loved deeply hurt him and he blanks out with emotion remembering this. If there was a scene like this with Jon and Sansa, I would agree there is something there. But there isn’t. Jon is just absolutely indifferent to everything Sansa.

And Sansa straight up admits to forgetting about Jon, when there was the chance for her to think about Jon while playing a pretend bastard.

Jon's rise to LC and Sansa's descend to bastardy would actually resonate and emotionally connect if GRRM wrote the characters introspecting on it and each other. That never happens.

In ADwD there was the chance for GRRM to write Jon being concerned for Sansa married to Tyrion or include Sansa in the chapter where Jon ponders on whether to accept Stannis' offer. But again, nothing. Instead he writes Jon thinking about Tyrion. Why? Because for GRRM the pertinent, story relevant relationship here is Jon-Tyion, not Jon-Sansa. It's Jon-Tyrion he is building up. They parted as friends, will they remain friends, will they meet as enemies, will they be able to work together? etc.

Jon/Tyrion spend more time together in the books than Jon/Sansa. They probably talked more to each other than Jon/Sansa. Jon/Tyrion shook hands and parted as friends, Jon/Sansa did not even say goodbye at WF though they wouldn't have ever seen each other again. When Jon hears that Ned and the girls may return he's excited to see and talk to Ned and Arya, not Sansa.

I am not kidding when I say that Jon/Satin have more in story material as a ship than Jon/Sansa. Jon/Satin have more of an emotional connection with each other than Jon/Sansa.

Jonsas write all these metas about romance and how GRRM is writing a love story and has anyone read any romance like this? Did Darcy and Elizabeth have a connection only in the last 3/4rth of the book. Did Emma and Mr. Knightley have a connection only at the end? Did Fanny and Edmund only know each other towards the end?

Where's the emotional resonance and investment in this couple on the page?

Jon and Dany have not even met each other, don't know of each other, are on different continents and yet GRRM is giving them parallel arcs in the corners of the world, Dany is getting visions of sweet smelling blue roses at the wall and Jon is wishing for a dragon or three. We don't know what sort of relationship Jon/Dany will have in the future - but we do know they will meet and interact. Because she's fire and the mother of dragons and Jon is fighting an Icy existential apocalypse.

As for Jon/Arya - there's so much material, Jonrya shippers don't even know what to do with it. There's 5 books chock full of material. There's the leaked OG outline ( As an aside it's hilarious how Jonsas use the OG outline as proof that Jonsa is happening. They don’t even explain, just OG outline = Jonsa.. like how?!)

And that's the funny part - everything they want for Sansa and Jonsa, is what GRRM has written for Arya. But Arya does not work as a self insert for them and she is not beautiful enough and feminine enough for them to get the romance arc. So they keep trying to shove Sansa in there like trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

And for all their talk of how Jon had a 'pre-canon crush' on Sansa, you know who in canon, in the text hoped to marry Sansa? Theon Greyjoy. But of course Theon is not who they want for Sansa so they make up how Jon's pain at being a bastard is all about Sansa.

There's Sansa imagining kisses with the Hound and GRRM saying and I quote "I have played with it (Sansa/Sandor) in the books. There is something there". And I am not kidding there are Jonsa shippers who apparently hate SanSan because it's not canon unlike Jonsa 🤣. SanSan shippers are all apparently Sansa haters....

They continue to ignore that GRRM is writing romance arcs for girls like Arya, Brienne, Lyanna in the books.

Jon/Sansa is somehow this secret romance happening off page. Even the central mystery of the series R+L=J has clues in the books - Ned's fever dream of Lyanna lying in a bed of blood, Robert talking about kings hidden under all that snow etc. But Jonsa is so secretive the clues are in the family tree not even written in the books.

Granny: Are you trying to say something to the reader by drilling into us how much Arya and Jon love each other?

George R.R. Martin: “Say something to the reader? No, I’m just reporting how the characters feel. Of course, everything in the book says something to the reader"- GRRM

Meanwhile a Sansa stan probably: Are you trying to say something to the reader by writing nothing for Jon and Sansa?

GRRM: .........

If GRRM wants Jon/Sansa to happen in the books, he will write for it. He will set it up. He will connect these characters. That he has failed to do so means there is nothing there.

"The internet affects all this to a degree it was never affected before," Martin tells EW when asked about fan reaction to the final season. "Like Jon Snow's parentage. There were early hints about [who Snow's parents were] in the books, but only one reader in 100 put it together. And before the internet that was fine — for 99 readers out of 100 when Jon Snow's parentage gets revealed it would be, 'Oh, that's a great twist!' But in the age of the internet, even if only one person in 100 figures it out then that one person posts it online and the other 99 people read it and go, 'Oh, that makes sense.' Suddenly the twist you're building towards is out there. And there is a temptation to then change it [in the upcoming books] — 'Oh my god, it's screwed up, I have to come up with something different.' But that's wrong. Because you've been planning for a certain ending and if you suddenly change direction just because somebody figured it out, or because they don't like it, then it screws up the whole structure. So no, I don't read the fan sites. I want to write the book I've always intended to write all along. And when it comes out they can like it or they can not like it."

Unlike the show, GRRM is not going to randomly plop characters into their ending. He is building up to it.

Even the characters closest to Jon have nothing to do with Sansa. GRRM writes Jon's closest friend Sam meeting with Bran and then going all the way to Braavos to meet with Arya and then Aemon telling him about Daenerys and meeting Marwyn and probably meeting with Tyrion and Daenerys in the next book. Jon's wolf dreams have nothing to do with Sansa, but he can connect with Arya and Bran and Rickon - even Dany half a world away hears a wolf howling at the same time Jon dies.

And the most obnoxious part is that they don't even like Jon. They like and reblog Jon critical posts, undermine his book relationships, his story themes, his skillsets. I haven't seen one positive Jon post from that lot.

And yes, Jon is sexist towards girls like Sansa. Then why the fuck are you shipping him with your girl?

Honestly, Jonsa shippers are one of the most stupidest group of people I have ever come across on the internets.

[istumpysk]

I can’t decide what’s the most indisputable proof of a Jonsa romance. Jonnel x Sansa, the Ashford Theory, the Byron hints (my personal fave), the almost identical wishes and dreams of family, R+L=J apparently being useless to the plot, the fact that they rarely think about each other, Jon’s attitude of “the grapes are too sour anyway” towards ladies and ladylike women, Jon being attracted to Ygritte’s softest traits and moments that remind everyone of Sansa (while being appalled by her ruthlessness, violence and mentality in general), Sansa’s crush on Jon’s lookalike, Jon’s “Sansa looked radiant”, Jon admiring Val with dark honey hair and close to Ghost (while rejecting the silver-haired Val), Jon killing Slynt and becoming Sansa’s official hero (glorious), Jon and Sansa being undeniably compatible, especially because of their shared softness and romanticism, their marriage solving many political problems and making sure Catelyn’s grandchildren rule Winterfell (her greatest fear).

They’re just...too strong. There’s no possible way we misinterpreted. They make too much sense, both in regards to their personalities and to the plot. This ship is unsinkable. I’d be extremely confused if Martin pulls a D&D and chickens out. But that won’t happen. The foundation is already strong as steel.

Damn anon, let em know. You’ve got me all amped up over here. Send something like this to me at least once a week, okay?

To say it’s impossible to misinterpret sometimes feels like an understatement, huh?

My vote for most irrefutable evidence is the stuff that makes antis squirm, in my experience. The material they really struggle to overcome, because it’s so obviously meant to directly reference Jon and Sansa. They’d have to deliberately portray themselves as slow to deny it.

Jonnel (One-Eye) and Sansa Stark

The Pact of Ice and Fire

The outline 

Say what you want about that outline, it puts an end to any talk that George would never explore that angle with the Starks. It also immediately kills the notion that this series was ever about Jon x Daenerys, lulz.

Of course the most irrefutable evidence isn’t necessarily my favourite. I'm a sucker for all the foreshadowing that points to the angsty romance to come. Nobody cares about boring ass political matches. Give us deep palpable love, George.

[agentrouka-blog]

I often read that Robb making mistake by marrying Jeyne W which leads to his lords left him and breaking of oath with Freys is what leads to his death. But Lannisters, Roose and Freys were also responsible for breaking guest rights to kill him and his mother. What do you think about actual Robb failure which made him doomed and how starks will learn from it?

Hi there!!

I'm not immersed enough in the warfare aspect of the stories to answer this with confidence. Many factors combined to doom Robb.

But the underlying reason was trust placed in those who had been forced into submission in the past. The Ironborn. Theon. The Boltons. Historically, the Starks conquered much of their territory and as recently as a decade ago held a child hostage to force their father to comply. Bad karma. Incidentally, Robb places his trust in just these people. That's the self-inflicted doom.

I am fairly certain that Roose Bolton was mentally ready to turn on the Starks the moment Ned went South, certainly by the time Ned was arrested. He married Fat Walda almost immediately after the Battle at the Green Fork, if I'm not mistaken, creating his own separate bond with Walder, while Ramsay began messing around in the North, and he was certainly aware of what the Karstark disruption was doing to the Northern political landscape, as well, making sure to send Harrion into the same doomed battle that saw Tallheart killed and Glover captured, paving the way for Alys Karstark's planned forced marriage to her corrupt uncle. A significant part of Robb's army is destroyed at the nonsensical attack on Duskendale.

This is ordered before the news of Robb's Wedding ever arrived. Duskendale is already a done deal. Darry burning is a done deal, paving the way for Amerei Frey (of Darry heritage) and Lancel taking over, a match likely planned before the Blackwater and made official after his full recovery in AFFC. All this is done in collusion with Tywin. Those important letters are happening even before Jeyne Westerling. We know Tywin was in touch with Sybell Spicer and she gave Jeyne moon tea from the start. Tywin had a long reach. Robb was unmatched in battle but surrounded by treachery. Or "treachery", because what does Sybell owe a guy who invaded her castle? Nothing.

Ramsay cleaned up after Theon in the North and by capturing him held a key to negotiate with the Ironborn at Moat Cailin. By that point the Jeyne incident only tipped over the Freys. I think.

Anyway, Robb was doomed by his ancestors' forceful submission of the North, in a way. When the Starks were weak, Ironborn and Boltons struck. This is a fair mirror to the Targaryens, and it is emphasized in the story of the Rape of the Sisters later on. The Starks are not unproblematic angels. None of the Northerners are, if you consider the fate of Lady Hornwood or Jeyne Poole.

Narratively, Robb pays for this as much as he pays for submitting to his society's sexism. Disregarding Cat's advice, discounting the value of his sisters, refusing to prioritize family and peace over warfare, at the cost of the peasants who are plundered, raped and murdered on either side. Independence is a worthy cause, but Torrhen Stark chose peace to save lives. Robb refused peace. Understandably so, the Lannisters killed Ned, but his own house was not in order, so to speak, and it ended up strangling him. You cannot resist oppression on a throne that was errected on oppression. (Contrast Dorne!)

When the North is done with its internal strife, they will be ready again for kingship based on the kind of unity that is earned, not conquered. Jon earns Alys' support. The Manderlys are loyal because of past generosity. The Liddle is appreciative of the peace in the land that the Starks worked to uphold. That sort of thing. Asha was negotiating with Lady Glover for resettlement, which would create a true peaceful coexistence, just like with the wildlings at the Wall and in the future in the Gift. Long-term, peaceful, well-built ties. Not force.

The final hurdle will be the sexism in the North. Sansa the elder could not rule in her own right as a girl. She needed to marry her uncle Jonnel who became Lord Stark. (Whatever their personal relationship was, the political one is bathed in sexism.) I think this wrinkle will be adressed strongly in the Northern succession arc coming up in TWOW and in ADOS. And not by a marriage of convenience. That would be marrying Sansa for her claim. (Currently prevented by her marriage to Tyrion anyway.)

For true balance, Sansa needs to be crowned in her own right, independent of marriage. In a North decimated of many of its male heirs, succession through the female line looks like it could win some much overdue legal recognition for all the nobility, not just the crown.

Basically, in order to restore what was destroyed, the Starklings need to revamp the whole enterprise of what it means to rule in the North. I made a post a while ago about this, called "House Stark Redemption Arc". I still stand by that.

[janiedean]

Do you think Jonsa is going to happen? I did read some meta about foreshadowing and it's a "squint if you miss it" but there is stuff. For example. Jonnel/Sansa stark in the family tree. People say the fact that Jon didn't care about Sansa being wed to Tyrion, compared to Arya being wed to Ramsay means he his repressing his painful memories and how he has a secret crush on her.

... tldr and sorry for the harshness: no, but if you want to go into the details, with no offense to anyone shipping it of course:

as I already recently ranted, jon and sansa are in two totally different brackets - jon is a main five, sansa is in the following bracket, jon has the entire chosen one storyline plus being the center of the entire story going on, sansa has the I want the love story and I'll get it plotline which does not mesh with jon's so there's that;

sansa's story arc is admittedly painfully clear in the beginning as in: if she thinks she's going to marry a beautiful gallant pretty prince and she thinks it's joffrey who is like attractive and LOOKS gallant but we all know how it went, then she's going to end up with someone who is the total opposite, also if she wanted to be queen in the beginning then it means she's absolutely not going to be in the end bc her entire arc is about realizing that everything she wanted in the beginning is not what she truly wants, and since jon is absolutely poised to get kingship, divide the kingdoms and fuck off to the wildlings after there is no way that her storyline meshes with his like that;

sansa's only viable love interests at this point on page are sandor and tyrion, the end, which by the way are, guess what, not standard attractive and are two people who need to overcome their trauma but never treated her unfairly, and like... denying that in the text sansa is attracted to sandor (she MAKES UP that he kissed her, she dreams he comes to her on her wedding night, she's all like AH BUT JUST *I* KISSED THE HOUND etc like sorry but that's a thing never mind all the knightly investment subtext) and that sandor is her love interest on text is imvho absolutely senseless - you can ship whatever you want and realize that canon isn't going there and write fanfic, no one is gonna stop you, and I can accept the endgame theory from sansa/tyrion shippers even if I think sansa/sandor is it, but sansa/anyone else is absolutely out of the question;

also sandor is the only one sansa thinks about using all the criteria ned used to describe the knight he would find her which was better than joffrey bless whoever went and did the search (brave gentle and strong) and she doesn't use neither of those terms to think about jon, like there's more evidence for littlefinger based on that and idt lf is gonna be her intended;

they think they're siblings and like I know that saying 'BUT THE INCEST' in these books is not like an automatic NO because there's canon incest and the rival ship ie j*nerys also would be incest but like one thing is jc which is not endgame and plainly described as abusive/unhealthy, one thing is targ incests which like the narrative generally is like HEY THIS WAS NOT A GOOD IDEA ABOUT and one thing is falling in love with someone you thought was your sibling and you grew up with like that the moment you find out you're cousins - that... doesn't work like that. and like while I don't have a horse in this race and j*nerys is hardly my ideal endgame sorry but it's a lot more likely that jon would end up getting with someone who he never met before, was the sister of a father he never knew and doesn't even consider his father and he had no relation with before than with... someone he actually thought was his sister, even if he finds out she's his cousin that doesn't change it;

'repressing painful memories' jon has zero issue thinking about catelyn or sansa not treating him great so idk what he should be repressing;

arya vs sansa question: .... well that's like getting close to the entire point but not getting it, in the sense that while jon didn't take wf because it belonged to sansa - but he said he would have if ygritte had been alive and stannis said he could marry her and not val which I mean... says all honestly - technically he made vows saying he renounced his family which is the entire fucking point re arya - the point is that he didn't give those vows up for robb but he would for arya which was the one he was closest to which is what makes everyone else kill him and no he wouldn't have done that for sansa because she was the only one who kept him at a distance, but...

the entire damned point is that they have to reconnect as siblings. sansa going back north (which is gonna happen) and jon being there and most likely getting legitimized/getting robb's will etc means that they have, as adults (or at least... well not kids) realize that how she treated him was wrong and that they can build a relationship which means that each single text reference to each other which is really nothing romantic™ is posed to tell you THESE TWO WILL BE THE STARK SIBLINGS MEETING FIRST and since they didn't have a close rship before they will forge one now, but that doesn't mean that they're going to be romantic endgame, because jon's point isn't having the uber romantic storyline and sweeping a maiden off her feet and sansa already has at least one love interest posed to do exactly that and while their sl are absolutely meant to intersecate on a sibling finding each other again level they are off when it comes to romance;

also a j*nsa endgame would... imply that she becomes queen of the seven kingdoms and they stay reigning there when sansa is absolutely posed to stay in the north and do her own thing and jon is posed to destroy the united-westeros-because-a-targ-did-it legacy (which like... great bookend bc first legit targ king unites it, bastard stark-targaryen king who most likely is keeping the bastard name undoes it) and he is going to hate each second of it, so it doesn't add up with sansa getting her happy love song fairytale romance... which again she can get from other people that the text strongly pointed at already.

so: no because it makes no sense thematically for either of them and for that matter I don't even think jon*erys is eventual endgame tho I guess it has to happen at this point given the show mess idk but if either of them had to be j*nerys would make a load more sense and I still think that a targ restoration with two monarchs keeping on being monarchs is not what a dude who is obviously anti-monarchy has in mind for the endgame. like no offense to anyone into it ofc but again it has zero textual basis for being romantic endgame and it wouldn't even make either of them happy bc jon is not sansa's gentle brave strong knight and sansa isn't the kind of woman jon is actually into (ygritte reminded him of arya I mean) and idt he'd get romantic feelings for his sister who he's going to think of in that terms anyway so there's my two cents. and I understand that it's not smth that a lot of people would agree with but take it up with grrm because he's the one putting that in the text and not me X°D

[fedonciadale]

Funny thing about antis pushing for Lysa Sansa parallels is Lysa married a man named Jon in canon. They should be careful about what they wish for😋

Yes, indeed. It’s a bit like freaking out about a random Frey in the appendices whose name is Rhaegar and who has a son Jonos... and then twisting themselves into bretzels to avoid looking at the Jonnel/Sansa marriage in the Stark family tree.

Anyway Lysa with her jealousy directed at her older, more beautiful sister reminds me of someone else...

Honestly, I think if Jonsa were a more accepted theory people would go crazy with all the hints. But since it is hated, they put their fingers in their ears and sing “la,la,la”.

Thanks for the ask!

[butterflies-dragons]

That was a heartbreaking read :( Enlightening tho, TY!! While I was aware of the parallels between Marillion & hound's attacks, I hadn't noticed the recurring themes leading up to the hound's attack. I've seen others speculating about nightmare wrt Jonsa and IA with you that nightmare is Sansa's way of processing her trauma. But I also think it could be part of the "Jon is a foil to Sansa's false beasts" motif. Two men with scarred faces forced Sansa onto her bed & assaulted her, but the 3rd 1/2

Hello Anon,

Many thanks for your words.  Here is the post for anyone interested.

About scarred face men around Sansa, Jon wouldn’t be the third, in any case the forth or even the fifth, but Sansa could meet others before her reunion with Jon, a man from the Mountain Clans of the Vale for example, like the Burned Men.

So far we have:

Ilyn Payne has a scarred face (pockmarked).   

The Hound has a scarred face (burned).

Tyrion Lannister has a scarred face (noseless).    

I also suspect Lothor cut Marillion’s face while saving Sansa.

Illyn Payne didn’t try to rape Sansa but his interactions with Sansa are surrounded by rapey and phallic imagery... I know, it’s disturbing...

Sansa always feel naked next to Ilyn Payne:

“The king is gone hunting, but I know he will be pleased to see you when he returns,” the queen was saying to the two knights who knelt before her, but Sansa could not take her eyes off the third man. He seemed to feel the weight of her gaze. Slowly he turned his head. Lady growled. A terror as overwhelming as anything Sansa Stark had ever felt filled her suddenly. She stepped backward and bumped into someone.

(...)

There was general laughter, led by Lord Renly himself. The tension of a few moments ago was gone, and Sansa was beginning to feel comfortable … until Ser Ilyn Payne shouldered two men aside, and stood before her, unsmiling. He did not say a word. Lady bared her teeth and began to growl, a low rumble full of menace, but this time Sansa silenced the wolf with a gentle hand to the head. "I am sorry if I offended you, Ser Ilyn," she said. She waited for an answer, but none came. As the headsman looked at her, his pale colorless eyes seemed to strip the clothes away from her, and then the skin, leaving her soul naked before him. Still silent, he turned and walked away.

—A Game of Thrones - Sansa I

This line: “His pale colorless eyes seemed to strip the clothes away from her” sounds very rapey... And the reference to his “pale colorless eyes”  next to this line: “and then [strip] the skin, leaving her soul naked before him”, sounds like Bolton imagery, colorless eyes and flying skin.

Also, Ilyn Payne having Ice has a powerful and disturbing phallic imagery:   

The serving girls tried to talk to her when they brought her meals, but she never answered them. Once Grand Maester Pycelle came with a box of flasks and bottles, to ask if she was ill. He felt her brow, made her undress, and touched her all over while her bedmaid held her down. When he left he gave her a potion of honeywater and herbs and told her to drink a swallow every night. She drank it all right then and went back to sleep.

She dreamt of footsteps on the tower stair, an ominous scraping of leather on stone as a man climbed slowly toward her bedchamber, step by step. All she could do was huddle behind her door and listen, trembling, as he came closer and closer. It was Ser Ilyn Payne, she knew, coming for her with Ice in his hand, coming to take her head. There was no place to run, no place to hide, no way to bar the door. Finally the footsteps stopped and she knew he was just outside, standing there silent with his dead eyes and his long pocked face. That was when she realized she was naked. She crouched down, trying to cover herself with her hands, as her door began to swing open, creaking, the point of the greatsword poking through …

She woke murmuring, "Please, please, I’ll be good, I’ll be good, please don’t,” but there was no one to hear.

—A Game of Thrones - Sansa VI

Ned used Sansa to kill Lady, Sansa’s direwolf, a part of her soul.  So, in a way, Ice has cut Sansa already.

Later, Ilyn Payne used Ice to kill Ned, Sansa’s father.  So Ice is painted with Lady’s and Ned’s blood.  And a bloody sword is also a metaphor of a phallus deflowering a maiden:

"Brandon loved his sword. He loved to hone it. 'I want it sharp enough to shave the hair from a woman's cunt,' he used to say. And how he loved to use it. 'A bloody sword is a beautiful thing,' he told me once." 

"You knew him," Theon said.

The lantern light in her eyes made them seem as if they were afire. "Brandon was fostered at Barrowton with old Lord Dustin, the father of the one I'd later wed, but he spent most of his time riding the Rills. He loved to ride. His little sister took after him in that. A pair of centaurs, those two. And my lord father was always pleased to play host to the heir to Winterfell. My father had great ambitions for House Ryswell. He would have served up my maidenhead to any Stark who happened by, but there was no need. Brandon was never shy about taking what he wanted. I am old now, a dried-up thing, too long a widow, but I still remember the look of my maiden's blood on his cock the night he claimed me. I think Brandon liked the sight as well. A bloody sword is a beautiful thing, yes. It hurt, but it was a sweet pain.

—A Dance with Dragons - The Turncloak

In contrast to Ned cleaning Ice after using the sword, Ilyn Payne keep it bloody:

Sansa had not even seen Ser Ilyn return to the hall, but suddenly there he was, striding from the shadows behind the dais as silent as a cat. He carried Ice unsheathed. Her father had always cleaned the blade in the godswood after he took a man’s head, Sansa recalled, but Ser Ilyn was not so fastidious. There was blood drying on the rippling steel, the red already fading to brown. “Tell Lady Sansa why I keep you by us,” said Cersei.

Ser Ilyn opened his mouth and emitted a choking rattle. His pox-scarred face had no expression.

“He’s here for us, he says,” the queen said. “Stannis may take the city and he may take the throne, but I will not suffer him to judge me. I do not mean for him to have us alive.”

“Us?”

“You heard me. So perhaps you had best pray again, Sansa, and for a different outcome. The Starks will have no joy from the fall of House Lannister, I promise you.” She reached out and touched Sansa’s hair, brushing it lightly away from her neck.”

—A Clash of Kings - Sansa VI

Sansa even dreams having her wedding night with Illyn Payne: 

“Once she dreamed it was still her marrying Joff, not Margaery, and on their wedding night he turned into the headsman Ilyn Payne. She woke trembling.”

—A Storm of Swords - Sansa II

So I think we must count Ilyn Payne in the scarred face men with rapey/non con connotations surrounding Sansa list, next to the Hound, Tyrion and Marilion that later also lost his eyes. 

And in AFFC Sansa meets another scarred face man: 

The gaoler Mord came with him, a monstrous man with small black eyes and a lopsided, scarred face. One ear and part of his cheek had been cleaved off in some battle, but twenty stone of pallid white flesh remained. His clothes fit poorly and had a rank, ripe smell. 

A Feast for Crows - Sansa I

Sound familiar?

Anyway, let’s talk about Jon now.  

Among all these men, Jon’s scar in his left eyes, a gift from Orell’s eagle, is almost nothing.  He is not disfigured like the Hound (half face burned), Tyrion (noseless) and Marilion (lost his eyes).  But there are theories that he could lose an eyes, like Waymar Royce his look-alike, an Jonnel ‘One Eye’ Stark, his ancestor and almost name-sake.   

Also, among all these men called beast in figurative sense, Jon’s beastly status is about him being a warg, a skinchanger.  Jon is both Beast and Man. That’s why there are theories about Jon’s soul living inside Ghost after his physical death.  

And finally Jon is the only hidden/secret prince that is a very significant parallel with the Beast from the fairy tale “Beauty and the Beast.” 

You can read more about jonsa and “Beauty and the Beast” in the following links:  

In the original fairy tale ‘La Belle et la Bête’ written by Gabrielle-Suzanne Barbot de Villeneuve, Beauty and Beast/Prince are cousins.

There is a version of Beauty and the Beast where the Beast is a white wolf.

Other ship questioning jonsa and its connections with Beauty and the Beast.

Other ship questioning jonsa and its connections with Beauty and the Beast II.

Other ship questioning jonsa and its connections with Beauty and the Beast III. 

I agree that Jon won’t assault Sansa and that she will probably sing to him spontaneous and willingly.  Also take note that the Beast from “Beauty and the Beast” was very courteous, he needed to court Beauty and make her see him beyond his beastly appearance, in order to break his curse.           

Even in GRRM’s favorite version of the tale, the 1946 French film “La Belle et la Bête” directed by Jean Cocteau, “The Beast invites Belle to dinner, where he tells her that she's in equal command to him and that she will be asked every day to marry him. Days pass as Belle grows more accustomed to and fond of the Beast, but she continues to refuse marriage”.

So, Jon won’t be part of that long list of butchers around Sansa. 

I got your point, you made sense, don’t worry.  But I refuse to associate Jon with traumatic Sansa’s nightmares.  I wish for him to be A Dream of Spring.        

Thanks for your message.

[tomakeitbeautifultolive]

Do you think D&D Jon act in character or out of character by rebuffing Dany for good because of their relation? I read somewhere there were some uncle-niece marriages in the Stark ancestry, so I don’t know how icky it is for people in the North.

Anon, I love this question. Yes, absolutely! Jon’s repulsion to aunt incest is a bit too modern, if you ask me. Wish the writers, too, understood that he lives in Westeros, not on fucking Earth.

First of all, let’s take a look at what incest actually means in Westeros, according to the wiki:

“The two main religions practiced in the Seven Kingdoms, the Faith of the Seven and the old gods, consider incest to be a vile sin. However in Westeros incest is only applied if father lays with daughter, mother lays with son, or brother to sister, and the children of such unions are considered abominations.”

No mention of aunt and nephew. Further:

“In marriage customs, it is acceptable and in fact quite common among the nobility for cousins to wed. Examples include Tywin and Joanna Lannister (first cousins), and Rickard and Lyarra Stark (first cousins once removed).”

(For those who don’t know, those are Ned’s parents)

So, House Stark is down with cousin marriage, as well as almost-cousin-marriage in present day:

“A marriage has been proposed between Robert Arryn and Sansa Stark (first cousins), to which the degree of common ancestry was not an objection.”

And we get a little more info on incest within House Stark:

“The views regarding marriages between an uncle and a niece (or an aunt to a nephew) might differ between the Faith and the old gods. Although the High Septon protested against a possible marriage between Prince Maegor Targaryen and his niece Rhaena, in the north, Serena Stark had been wed to her half-uncle, Edric, while her sister Sansa Stark had been wed to her half-uncle Jonnel Stark. The only exception to condemnation of incest in Westeros is when it occurs in House Targaryen.”

Whether or not Jon grew up in the north, he’s still a Targaryen - whose royal incestuous marriages were a part of his lineage:

“In the Valyrian Freehold, it was custom among the dragonlords to marry brother to sister, or, if that was not possible, an uncle to a niece, or an aunt to a nephew.”

And considering that the only people to ride dragons in GoT were both Targaryens, this idea that “The line must be kept pure”, the implication here is that dragonriders must preserve their magical blood by doubling up on it.

All of that aside…

It appears that the foreshadowing involving Daenerys overcoming the Mirri Maz Duur ‘curse’ was all for nought, anyway. So then, if Daenerys really is infertile and cannot bear children, then what exactly makes it so gross or appalling? If there is no threat of 'deformed’ or 'mad’ children?

And speaking of foreshadowing, the fuck was this shit about?:

The fuck were lines like this all about?:

“Five Aegons had ruled the Seven Kingdoms of Westeros. There would have been a sixth, but the Usurper’s dogs had murdered her brother’s son when he was still a babe at the breast. If he had lived, I might have married him.”

Why do we get so much information about incest, specifically Targaryen incest, such as “the Doctrine of Exceptionalism, which permitted incestuous marriages for Targaryens, as the Gods had made Valyrians differently from the Andals.” - which went on to become an official tenet of the Faith of the Seven - if it never comes into play?

“Foreshadowing? I don’t know her.”

TL;DR:

Jon’s Stark side of the family practices incest (albeit to a very slightly lesser degree, but incest all the same).

Jon’s Targaryen side has been marrying brother to sister or aunt to nephew for thousands of years.

Targaryen incest is excused by a tenet of the largest religion in Westeros - the one practiced in King’s Landing, in which Daenerys intended to rule.

While Jon’s religion, the old gods, view incest as vile, it is specifically stated that it means parent/child or sibling incest, whereas aunt/nephew marriage seems to be excluded.

[dwellordream]

A bit of a strange question, but as the queen of AUs, what do you think wouldve happened to the course of ASOIAF events if robb had instead been a woman?

Thank you! I’ve actually debated doing a ‘Robyn, eldest child of House Stark’ fic multiple times, but I don’t think it will be occurring any time soon because once I’m done with Haunt/Hunt it’s going to be a while before I want to touch anything set during the War of the Five Kings timeline. assuming literally everything else stays the same, and Catelyn simply happens to give birth to a daughter at Riverrun instead of a son: (WARNING this is just me talking off the top of my head, I am not an acclaimed ASOIAF theorist or scholar haha) I honestly have no idea what Catelyn would name her. We don’t know if she and Ned even discussed potential names for their children in the two weeks they had together before he went back to war, so it’s really anyone’s guess. I *don’t* think Catelyn would have felt comfortable naming her Lyarra or Lyanna or Branda without Ned’s explicit approval, and she certainly would have wanted to give her daughter a Stark or northern name, especially since the child was born in Riverrun and we’re assuming she’s redhaired and blue-eyed like Robb in canon. Robyn was historically a Ryswell lady who ruled as Lady of Winterfell after marrying Jonnel Stark (although the marriage produced no heirs) and it’s also close to Robb, so if it were me writing the fic I’d probably just go with that.  There’s also just the always ‘safe’ name choices of Jeyne or Alys/Alysanne, which Catelyn might have felt were very inoffensive names no one could have an issue with. Berena or Arrana or even Serena or Sansa could be other options, but if I was writing this AU I’d want to keep the name change as simple as possible so as not to confuse anyone. So Catelyn gives birth to a little Robyn Stark. I am sure she adores her daughter, but I think she would be feeling a bit crestfallen and insecure that she hasn’t given House Stark a male heir while Ned is off to war- especially since there has never been a Lady of Winterfell ruling in her own right- a lot of fics like to portray the North as being much more egalitarian than the South, but the canonical evidence for that is... shoddy. I think the first big issue is obviously going to be Ned bringing Jon back to Winterfell. Catelyn shows up with her infant daughter Robyn- already a stranger in a strange place, likely feeling insecure and uncertain of her relationship with Ned, which is nonexistent, and surprise! There’s a bastard son literally sitting in the nursery. So I think we can take Catelyn’s canonical feelings of ‘why the HELL would you RAISE your ILLEGITIMATE SON WHO LOOKS JUST LIKE YOU alongside OUR CHILDREN and EXPECT ME TO BE OKAY WITH THIS’ and magnify that by about 10?  I would say Catelyn and Jon’s already rocky dynamic is going to be that much worse in this AU, especially since Catelyn then does not have a son until the birth of Bran in 290 AC. That’s about 7 years where Jon is the only male child of Ned’s at Winterfell. 7 years for people to wonder if he might be legitimized if Catelyn doesn’t have any sons. Unless Ned takes some proactive steps to reassure Catelyn that Robyn could inherit his seat and he wouldn’t put Jon in front of her, I think the relationship between Ned and Cat is going to be quite tense. Hateful and toxic to the degree of Robert and Cersei? No, but frosty and distant. Maybe it would improve with the birth of Bran, maybe it would improve if Ned caved and agreed to send Jon to ward somewhere nearby, such as with House Cerwyn or House Hornwood or even the Tallharts, but I do think we would then see a Ned and Cat at the start of 298 AC who are not as close and deeply in love as they are in canon. That’s not to say I think they’d loathe each other but it would be different. Anyways, I would still say Robyn has a pretty happy childhood. I think her personality would be reasonably similar to Robb’s in canon- she’s loving and protective of her siblings, looks up to her parents, is proud of her Northern heritage but worships both the Seven and the old gods. I think her and Sansa would be quite close, and I think since Robb is pretty much the ‘ideal’ if young and sheltered male heir in canon, Robyn would pretty much adhere to the gender norms of Westeros. I don’t think she’d be a tomboy to the degree that Arya is, although she might quite enjoy hunting, hawking, and riding, and I think she’d have some close friends in say, the Manderly sisters or Alys Karstark (I like to write female friendships, anyways). But one major difference is, of course, that Robyn is not considered Ned’s heir. Bran is. This changes Bran’s personality a bit. I think he is overall still his sweet, curious self, dreaming of becoming a knight, but I think that is tampered some by the pressure to grow up and become a worthy successor to his well-loved and respected father. So we might see a bit of a more ‘mature’ Bran or just one who doesn’t really have much time to be scampering about Winterfell- he’s busy with his lessons or training. Robyn I think would love both Sansa and Arya and be a good intermediary between the two of them, although Arya might still be very insecure about not being as feminine or graceful as her two popular older sisters. I do think Robyn would help abate some of her insecurity and feelings of worthlessness, though; she could keep Sansa and Jeyne in line from being bullying or just derisive of Arya’s wild ways, and she could also maybe show Arya some of the value in things like needlework and a lady’s traditional duties, etc. The big question here then becomes, when Robert shows up, does he want Joffrey betrothed to Robyn instead of Sansa? We can assume Robyn and Sansa both look quite similar, but Robyn is the elder sister and was born around mid-283 AC, while Joffrey was born in early 286 AC, I think that age difference would be seen as completely acceptable. So I’m inclined to say yes, there is talk of a betrothal between Joffrey and Robyn. Is Robyn as charmed by Joffrey as Sansa is in canon? Eh, she might not hate him right off the bat, but I can’t see her really having much of a crush, either. Does this influence Ned to think differently of agreeing to the betrothal, if Robyn expresses no interest in wedding Joffrey and becoming queen someday, or does he put more value on not offending Robert?  If I was writing this AU my personal solution would be to have Robyn already betrothed by 298 AC, thus averting the problem of having her just ‘replace’ Sansa in her own plot. It would also make sense in that as Robyn would be a 14 year old girl at the start of the story, it would seem like there might be more pressure to figure out a betrothal for her than there was for Robb. Given Ned’s desire to shelter his children and keep them close, I think he and Catelyn would want Robyn either marrying into a Northern house or a Riverlands house where they would know what family she was marrying into well and know what to expect. Just in terms of negotiating this betrothal, the North might be more convenient for everyone. Cley Cerwyn, Daryn Hornwood, Harrion Karstark, Jojen Reed, and Smalljon Umber would all be options. Robyn would be considered a very appealing choice in wife in order to get influence with the Starks, so lots of houses would be vying for her to marry into their families. Obviously Robyn being betrothed to a northern lordling sort of sets her up to be left behind as acting Lady of Winterfell when all the shit starts going on, with Catelyn trusting her to look after her little brothers and keep the castle in order. Does Bran still fall in this AU in the first place? I guess it really depends. He might have less chances to sneak off with him being expected to spend time around Joffrey and Tommen as Ned’s eldest son. If he does fall, that is an even bigger blow to House Stark in the eyes of their allies- Ned’s heir is crippled, what now, would probably be the major thought. Rickon is just 3- it will be at least a decade before he’s ruling anyone. This might provide an opportunity, plot-wise for Robyn to step up to the plate and maybe the North winds up being steered in the direction of ‘we love Lady Robyn and her betrothed, *insert Daryn or Harrion or Cley, etc!*’. If she ends up being the one to call their banners... who knows. Obviously she wouldn’t be fighting any battles, but I think Catelyn would see nothing wrong with her daughter leading and making battle plans.  That’s kind of all I got at the moment but it’s definitely an interesting concept! How does Theon view her? What is her relationship like with Jon? Does she still name her direwolf Grey Wind? How does her relationship with Catelyn develop as she grows into a young woman making serious political decisions, not all of which her mother agrees with? Does she feel differently about suing for peace with the Lannisters and trying to save Sansa and Arya at all costs, being a woman herself?

[vicleesi]

About GoT Episode 4:

First of all, I’m completely exhausted from turning a blind eye to the multiple flaws in the D & D scripts (and it was they who wrote this episode). The strength of Game of Thrones came right from the details thanks to the incredible world that George R. R. Martin created and D & D destroyed. So no, I will not spare you them.

- The beginning was good. I just do not understand why Jon made his speech without looking at the survivors of Winterfell.

- The party dinner was generally good. In these last seasons, Game of Thrones has managed to maintain a good quality in the interaction between characthers. Episode 2 was basically all that and it was good for me. The problem is when GoT starts off for the story  - which is already lost.

- Daenerys’s loneliness was well portrayed. Too bad the series prematurely killed Selmy Barristan, did not it?

- First failure of attention to detail that detracts from the series’ worldbuilding: Gendry Rivers, what? Is he from the Riverlands, by any chance? Bastard born and raised in King’s Landing is named after Waters. His name was Gendry Waters (actually it was just Gendry, since Robert never recognized him as his bastard son). Why change that, D & D? To be different?

- I wish Gendry good luck trying to persuade the Storm lords to bend over to a bastard who does not understand a thing about ruling a castle. But of course the series will not talk about that. At least they did not give Storm’s to Brienne or to Davos (by the way, when the Davos family will show up?)

- Leaving a bit out of order, but taking advantage of feudal politics, what’s going on in Dorne?” D & D mentioned a new Prince of Dorne who swore loyalty to Daenerys. Hi? What? When? Who? WHY??? D & D had the brilliant idea of ​​making the Martells exterminate each other and still reap the rewards of their genius. Dorne remains the worst arc in the series and quite possibly one of the worst book-media visual adaptations ever.

- They also mentioned Riverrun again. What happened to the Riverlands after the Freys all died? Where is Edmure Tully? Who controls Riverrun?

- Writers creating a whole scene by saying that Brienne is a virgin. Not necessary.

- There was not a crippled nephew of Daeron Targaryen. D & D creating Targaryens whenever they want, although there is a well-defined story in the books. (FIRE AND BLOOD)

- There was finally a scene between Sandor and Sansa. It only took 4 episodes to happen. Once again they put Sansa as the product of her suffering, justifying the idiot choices D & D made for her character. Nothing new, otherwise it was a totally forgettable dialogue (I already forgot).

- The Bronn Paradox: If Bronn is not serving Daenerys while the war is rolling, who guarantees that he will receive his castle in the end? Especially considering he was utterly disillusioned with the promises of the Lannisters to the point of being ready to kill his two best friends? In fact, did D & D forget that Jaime himself had offered Highgarden to the Bronn last season?

- Again, as for Gendry, I wish Bronn good luck in trying to establish his feudal dominion over the proud lords of Highgarden who did not even tolerate the right Tyrells, and the Tyrells were an old family and had already been entrenched in there for centuries. Of course, D & D do not care.

- The Paradox of the Wildlings: Why were they known as wildlings? Because they tried to conquer the Wall from time to time and were always looting the North in search of resources and riches. Because their land was a shit, where nothing grew and it was always winter, basically. Now the they finally made it through the Wall and gain access to the best lands, even more with the support of the Winterfell and Starks. What do they do? That’s right: they go back to their shit place because D & D have that same shit on their heads.

- What else is north of Winterfell and south of the Wall are lands with no one, thanks to the King of the Night.“ But the wildlings choose to go back to Castle Black and, by all means, beyond the Wall. Seven Hells.

- I will not even comment on Jon’s scene sending Ghost away.” If it was for him to appear that way, it was better for the wolf to have been m.i.a as before.

- Sam Tarly is a Night’s Watch man. Men of Night’s Watch should not have children. When will anyone say that? Did not Jon even mention it? What happened to Night’s Watch? Why is Sam still dressed in black? If he’s out, why did not he become Lord Tarly?

- The arc of Night’s Watch is going to be without conclusion anyway? Are they gone?

- The army of the living has lost only half its men? It was not what it looked like in episode 3. But okay, D & D create and describe armies whenever they think it’s valid - just like Night’s Watch, apparently.

- As they are doing this season, D & D cut important dialogue scenes because they do not know what to write. In the first episode they cut off Daenerys before she finished threatening Sansa. In the second episode they cut their scene together before Dany could answer the question “What about the North?”. At the end of it cut the scene Jon x Dany in the crypts. Now they cut the scene of Sansa and Arya discovering that Jon is not their brother. Why, man? What is the reason? I’m shocked that D & D did not cut Jon’s reaction to finding out that he’s a bastard of Rhaegar and Lyanna (yes, he’s a bastard, D & D, no matter how many fanfics they write).

- Arya in the first moment: we are a family! Arya in 2nd moment: left King’s Landing, goodbye Winterfell, until never again! and yes she left for good, she said she ain’t coming back!

That was the good part of the episode. Let’s go to the bad part!!

- So you want to tell me that Euron can hit three harpoons in a dragon in mid-flight?“

- So you want to tell me that Daenerys from the sky was unable to see the Greyjoy fleet hidden behind an islet?”

- So you want to tell me that Daenerys never considered the possibility that it was a bad idea to sail to Dragonstone as they knew Euron controlled the seas there?“

- So you want to tell me that Rhaegal was not killed by the zombie dragon brother in the apocalyptic Battle of the long night fighting for the fate of the men’s kingdom only to die in the next episode in a few seconds for Euron Greyjoy’s magical harpoons?

-So you want to tell me how easy it is to kill dragons like that?” It amazes me that Aegon conquered Westeros three hundred years ago.

- Daenerys should have flown directly to King’s Landing and fired at everything after the Rhaegal’s death. Fire and Blood!!

- Jaime returning to Cersei: hi? What the fuck? If it is to join her and not kill her right away, Jaime will be the greatest example of character assassination that D & D has committed since Stannis Baratheon.

- How did Team Dany know that Missandei had been captured? Euron made propaganda, sent in the email?

- Is Varys loyal to Jon Snow? REALLY? What does Varys know about Jon Snow? When did he meet Jon Snow? When did they share at least one scene together? They never talked. Varys never saw him rule. Where do the writers get these crazy ideas?

- Nonsense to be creating intrigue over the marriage between Jon and Daenerys. She will need to get married to have children and continue the dynasty. Who is she getting married to, Hot Pie?

- By the way, there have been marriages between uncles and nieces among the Starks. Brothers Jonnel and Edric Stark married their nieces Serena and Sansa Stark some 150 years ago to try to end a crisis of succession, since their father, Rickon, heir to Winterfell, had been killed in the conquest of Dorne. It would not surprise me if GRRM specifically placed these marriages in history just for this situation that was raised in the conversation between Tyrion and Varys. In fact, marriages between uncles and nieces were not exactly uncommon in our own history. In Brasil, Dom Pedro I was grandson of D. Maria I of Portugal, who was married to his uncle, D. Pedro III, precisely to avoid a dynastic crisis.

- Again the bullshit that Robert’s Rebellion was built on a lie. I imagine the Crazy King burning the Lord of Winterfell and his heir and begging for Ned and Robert’s head did not influence that at all.

- Dany is an emotional woman who’s going crazy. So we need a rational man to help her.

- Dany is an emotional woman who’s going crazy. So we need a rational man to help her!!

- Oh, excuse me if I repeated myself, but this nonsense does not go down. They disrespected Daenerys, disrespected her journey, disrespected even the “girl power” they tried to do last season (Dany, Olenna Tyrell, Cersei and the Martells). The mysoginism of these so-called D & D appearing once more to claim another innocent victim.

- Why did Cersei not kill Tyrion?

- Why did Cersei not kill Daenerys?

- Euron does not suspect anything after Tyrion reveals he knew Cersei was pregnant?“ Since Euron himelf knew only minutes ago?

- D & D really put an end to the apocalypse so we can have Cersei grinning in the last three episodes? Is this serious?

- Euron is Cersei’s puppy. Euron in the series is another completely character , they should have changed his name in the adaptation as they did with the Asha (Yara).

- No turning back with the Night King. D & D make us muggles.

- Finally: where’s the winter ??? It seems King’s Landing is in the tropics.

- Cancel this and the next two episodes. Let GoT finish in episode 3, at least so we would have something minimally satisfying. D & D continue to insult the viewer’s intelligence.

"At least the show’s songs never fails to please.”

*this analysis is not mine I translated from a brazilian friend

[nobodysuspectsthebutterfly]

Arya Flint is the next gen during the time the story is set, but she still might be one of the characters!

So, "The She-Wolves of Winterfell" (or whatever this Dunk & Egg story ends up getting titled) apparently has to do with the Winterfell succession drama after Beron Stark was gravely wounded fighting Dagon Greyjoy's invasion. The story involves “a group of formidable Stark wives, widows, mothers, and grandmothers” [source], including “five Lady Starks running Winterfell… with four of them widows of a bunch of fairly recent former Lord Starks, and the current Lady Stark” [source]. So these Lady Starks would be Lorra Royce as Beron's wife, and probably include Myriame Manderly (widow of Lord Rodwell), Alys Karstark (widow of Lord Brandon), Sansa Stark (widow of Lord Jonnel), and Serena Stark (widow of Lord Edric, who then married Jon Umber)... and maybe even Lynara Stark (widow of Lord Cregan, his third wife).

As for Arya Flint, her husband Rodrik is Beron's fifth son, and Beron's said to be "thirty-something" at this point, so Rodrik might not be old enough to be married yet. (Willam, Beron's second son, might or might not be married to Melantha Blackwood at this point, as his first wife Lyanne Glover had died in childbirth and young Nan came to Winterfell to nurse the baby, and Nan is commonly theorized to be the woman kissing Dunk in Bran's weirwood vision.) Still, even if Rodrik's not married yet, Arya Flint could be visiting Winterfell during this story anyway, as a future she-wolf and as potential foreshadowing for current ASOIAF.

Hopefully GRRM will get this story out at some point so we can actually see all these ladies...

Egg and Dunk are going to Winterfell, right ? So I was looking at the Starks lineage and I was wondering who are going to be the she-wolves of Winterfell...

Are we going to see the first Arya Stark (born Flint) or is it the generation above her ?

[yvvaine]

I really liked your Arya Flint gif-set!

Why thank you! I’m going to do more name-sake gifsets too. The one I’m almost done with that Ill post next is Daenerys Targaryen the first (wife of Maron Martell), I just have to finish coloring. I also have a Sansa Stark (daughter of Rodrick, wife of Jonnel) and a Jon Arryn edit almost done, but I’m having trouble on settling on a Sansa FC and a young Jon Arryn faceclaim, if any of you have suggestions. 

For Sansa the First I’ve been toying with Kirsten Stewart’s Snow White, as well as Adelaide Keign from Reign, but I;m not super over the moon with either. I mean she’s very much a stark (lineage wise) so dark hair, ideally a long-ish face - which i have a good amount of fc for - but I also want her to be on the younger side (and possibly slightly innocent looking?) which has made it a lot harder to find one. Anyways, if you guys have any ideas plz throw them out there!

[aryas]

Targ Restoration Rant (aka I made the mistake of venturing into the pro -Targaryen tag & discourse)

"You know nothing, Jon Snow. A true man steals a woman from afar, t'strengthen the clan. Women who bed brothers or fathers or clan kin offend the gods, and are cursed with weak and sickly children. Even monsters." --- Ygritte, ASOS

Clearly, GRRM has never painted Cersei x Jaime or Craster x his daughters in a very favourable light. But suddenly, incest between the 2 good and heroic guys (though the jury is still out on Daenerys) of the story is a-ok? Is it because they are a couple of magic übermenschen and are thus above morality and law of nature? Am I supposed to think GRRM now advocates for incest? But only under certain conditions, only when it involves the special and God-like Targaryens? Why do fans suddenly rejoice about this and wish for a Targ restoration? What kind of fresh hell has this fandom turned into?

[Cut for length]

Their main argument seems to be

Jon and Dany are nephew/aunt which is not considered incest in Westeros so it's all good! No one would bat an eye because even outside the Targs, there are cases of avunculate marriages.

And then they bring up the two known cases; Jonnel x Sansa Stark and Edric x Serena Stark. The former was (probably) a purely political union without issue. The latter did yield heirs but Serena was the daughter of Edric's half brother, so they weren't as closely related (same goes for Sansa, who was Serena's sister and Jonnel's half brother's daughter). Both probably happened for political/practical reasons and to solve major succession issues as Rickon Stark & Jeyne Manderly had two daughters but no male heir.

This comparison is not a very pertinent one because a marriage between Jon & Daenerys would be neither purely political nor practical as they are already involved and supposedly in love. Additionally, what kind of political gain would there be for either of them if we assume Jon's true parentage will be revealed publicly, combined with his ostensible betrayal of bending the knee and falling for a "foreign whore woman" (from the Northern lords' viewpoint), resulting in the loss of his already tenuous hold over the North or the election of another KitN or QitN? Over the last few seasons, the show dropped numerous anvil sized hints about how unwelcome foreign leaders are in the North, especially Targaryens. The Northern lords were already ready to unname Jon because they deemed he'd been away too long. It makes little sense that a Jon x Daenerys marriage would placate them post R+L=J unless they inexplicably decide to suddenly support what would essentially be the restoration of a dynasty they despise. It would also mean R+L=J and Jon's actions in season 7 (i.e bending the knee to a Targaryen, consorting with said Targaryen while being a secret Targaryen himself) would have little to no long-lasting effect and any conflict it caused would be resolved by a marriage that would have happened anyway if Jon had remained Ned's natural son.

Jon wouldn't need Daenerys if he decides to pursue the Iron Throne since his claim trumps hers. What's more, the people of Westeros are more likely to accept him as king of the 7 kingdoms over Daenerys given his Stark blood and the fact that he was raised and groomed for leadership in Westeros. He could potentially have the loyalty and allegiance of the Starks and their bannermen, the Wildlings, the Reach (through Sam), the Iron Islands (through Theon), the Vale (through Sansa and Sweetrobin) and possibly the Riverlands (through his Stark cousins' Tully heritage), in contrast to Dany whose sole remaining Westerosi ally is Jon. If they were to support a Targaryen candidate for the Iron Throne, I think they would favour Jon alone (or you know, married to someone who isn't a Targaryen conqueror).

And while Daenerys could absorb Jon's claim (and potential allies- though again, why would they support Jon x Daenerys over Jon on his own?) and make hers stronger by marrying him, she doesn't need him to lay claim to the 7 kingdoms either, what with her dragons and huge armies. Moreover, an "alliance" - if you can call giving up your kingdom as such - already exists with Jon seemingly having pledged himself to her and Daenerys naming him Warden of the North. She would have been better off marrying someone else to extend or strengthen her control over other regions and territories if there weren't so few candidates left on the show. The most logical way to strike an alliance would have been to marry Jon while he was KitN, pre parentage reveal, but for some obscure reason, the show completely bypassed this option.

But R+L=J turns everything upside down and Jon, once revealed as a trueborn Targaryen, would need to marry into a Northern house if he wants to keep/take back his kingship of the North. Marrying Daenerys would only strengthen his ties to the South and house Targaryen, which would be counterproductive and work against the desired outcome- uniting North & South or two major Houses.

In short, neither party would truly benefit politically from a marriage if Jon's parentage is made public and/or he ultimately loses the North, which is very likely. This is particularly true for Jon. Only Daenerys could somewhat profit from a political union but it would be at the risk of becoming Jon's queen consort in practice if not on paper (something I doubt she would accept) and, more importantly, it would be opening a whole can of worms given the stigma of Targaryen x Targaryen unions.

Because no matter of how (un)common and (un)acceptable avunculate marriages are in the universe of Westeros, Targ restoration fans usually ignore the fact that it wouldn't be just any nephew/aunt, it would be a full Targaryen union, which would have wholly different connotations for the people of Westeros given the fairly recent trauma of their reign. A reign that ended with a mad king whose madness is believed to be hereditary and blamed on generations of close interbreeding. I doubt the people of Westeros would readily accept a Targ power couple back at the helm if they have any say in it.

Plus, Daenerys' first impression didn't exactly help matters: a Targaryen conqueror with huge armies and grown dragons in tow who roasted a father and a son of a prominent House alive and destroyed the last harvest of the Reach in the beginning of winter and unwittingly handed over the greatest weapon of all times to their greatest enemy of all times and indirectly caused the Wall to fall and wants to marry her only other living Targaryen relative, of all people? The sense of déjà vu would be pretty disconcerting, to say the least.

These Pro-Targ fans also tend to dismiss the fact Jon & Daenerys are genetically closer to full siblings than aunts/nephews by claiming modern notions such as DNA conveniently have no bearing in a medieval-fantasy setting such as ASOIAF. In other words, people in-universe wouldn't realise or be bothered that Jon & Daenerys are more closely related (44-47%) than typical nephew/aunt (25%). I think they must have an inkling of the notion and dangers of consanguinity, however basic it may be, if cousin marriages are considered quite normal for the highborn while anything involving more closely related people is frowned upon or downright forbidden. As mentioned previously, even the two known cases of avunculate unions were between uncles and their half nieces, their degree of consanguinity being thus less than that of full uncle/niece and comparable to first cousins (12,5%). So people could at least vaguely understand that Jon & Daenerys share a higher degree of consanguinity than their relatedness would suggest.

All this begs the question; if GRRM wants the restoration of this dynasty and wants us to perceive this as a positive development, wouldn't he aim to improve it and stop the perpetuation of the very proclivity that precipitated their downfall and was at the root of so much suffering in Westeros? Would he "reward" an incestuous and destructive house by having it win out while others are extinct/on the brink of extinction?

If there is supposed to be a Targaryen reinstatement, there has to be a clean break from this dynasty's nefarious characteristics and habits i.e. imperialism, tyranny and incest. What would otherwise be the narrative point of Robert's (very justifiable) Rebellion and everything that unfolded in its aftermath? There should be some kind of progress. Jon & Daenerys, if they decide to take back the IT and get married after the R+L=J reveal, would mean regression. It would be synonymous with more incest, more super inbred and possibly cray-cray Targ heirs and more political (and genetic) isolationism. And with 2 grown dragons/WoMD (if they survive), their reign would equal more subjugation, intimidation and fear for the people of Westeros, even if Jon & Daenerys' initial intentions would be to create a new and better world. In other words, a repeat of everything that was toxic and problematic about the Targaryen dynasty. This scenario seems particularly unlikely when you take the author's personal anti-war/WoMD stance into account.

And lastly, this is what GRRM said about Targcest:

"The Targaryens have heavily interbred, like the Ptolemys of Egypt. As any horse or dog breeder can tell you, interbreeding accentuates both flaws and virtues, and pushes a lineage toward the extremes."

ASOIAF is a meditation on war, power and corruption but it's also a story about extremes --- wights/WW/Ice vs Fire/Daenerys/dragons, the inevitable clash and destruction they bring about and the importance of seeking balance, moderation and finding a middle ground in all things: justice instead of vengeance, sovereignty instead of oppression etc. Even Jon himself is the embodiment of the metaphorical balance between ice and fire. As such, the Targaryens/Targcest can be viewed as another extreme to be avoided. It's the antithesis of "balanced". What he says about accentuating both flaws and virtues is evocative of this famous passage:

"King Jaehaerys once told me that madness and greatness are two sides of the same coin. Every time a new Targaryen is born, he said, the gods toss the coin in the air and the world holds its breath to see how it will land." 

Some Targaryen fans like to think what the coin metaphor refers to is nothing but a myth but I would think the fact the author alludes to it in the above quote kind of refutes this theory. I also happen to think Jon & Daenerys each represent one facet of the coin. This analogy also effectively illustrates how unstable and inconsistent Targaryen rule truly was and could be again. Even if Jon & Daenerys end up being fair and progressive monarchs, what of their inbred children? On which side will the coin land for them? If there is anything Westeros needs after years of war waging, power struggles, political instability and the probably disastrous aftermath of the battle against the Others, it's consistency and stability.

Furthermore, the fact GRRM compares them to the Ptolemaic dynasty is not exactly a ringing endorsement. The Ptolemys were originally from Macedonia/Greece and ruled for close to 300 years over Egypt. Because they never deigned to mix their blood with outsiders and only wed brother/sister and occasionally uncle/niece and cousins, they never actually became Egyptian. Even Cleopatra was genetically Greek. They didn't assimilate with the local people, culture or language (Cleopatra being the only one who bothered to learn the language) and justified their incest by drawing comparison to Greek mythology and thus perceived themselves as Gods. The intermarriages also exacerbated feelings of jealousy and rivalry. Complot and murder within the family were a common occurrence. Aside from a couple of exceptions, they were quite inept rulers and the last +/- 200 years of their reign kind of sucked.

Sounds familiar? In broad strokes, this is pretty much a copy/paste of the history of the Targaryens. Does this sound like something we're supposed to root for? Their reign ended when Egypt submitted to Roman rule. And no, there was no Ptolemaic restoration.