#snow filter | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

amaltheas-garden · 9 months ago

Text

Jon and Sansa will bring the story of Rhaegar and Lyanna full circle:

We have very few details on the relationship between Rhaegar and Lyanna, but what we do know is Lyanna was in an unwanted betrothal to Robert at the time she disappeared with Rhaegar. Whether she went willingly or not is up to speculation. Aside from Robert, most accounts agree that Rhaegar embodied the fairy tale prince-like character (prior to the war). Lyanna wept at the beauty of his music, and was crowned his queen of love and beauty before leaving her family forever. Her story ends alone in Dorne, dying in her bed of blood, abandoned by the man she thought would save her, begging to go home.

It's easy to see then, the parallels between Lyanna's ill-fated romance and the romantic dreams of her niece, Sansa Stark. Although the two share few similarities in personality and hobbies, both became enamored by princes who hide their darker nature, and lured them away from the safety of their homeland, before going to war with their families. However, Lyanna's story ended far from the North, dying in childbirth, whereas Sansa has escaped that fate (even more interesting considering Lyanna's book storyline is a near one to one of Sansa's in the original outline). And, if we recall the very beginning of A Game of Thrones, Robert proposes to Ned that they wed Joffrey to Sansa, joining their houses as he and Lyanna might have. There is a conscious effort on Robert's part to set the past right through the relationships of their children. So right from the jump Sansa is cast as the Lyanna stand in, though she too escapes her "Baratheon" betrothal, and is on course to run straight into Rhaegar's son (as per the girl in grey theory).

So where does Jon lie in all this? If we take the girl in grey prophecy to be about Sansa, we know the two will meet sometime in the near future. Sansa has already become disillusioned of her chivalric ideals of love and knighthood (that's not to say she doesn't believe in heroes and honorable knights, just that she's far more skeptical of surface appearance), and yet, it will be her bastard brother who will embody the traits of the hero Sansa has been searching for. Rhaegar appeared as the perfect prince, yet was the one to kill Jon's mother, and Sansa, in a similar situation, is seduced by the charm and beauty of Prince Joffrey, only to be exposed to his vicious cruelty, narrowly escaping his family (even more interesting to consider Lyanna, had she survived, would not have been Queen, as Elia was still his lawful wife, and would be considered a mistress to the King as there was no chance of her escaping Rhaegar now that she carried his child, similar to Joffrey marrying Margaery, while threatening to make Sansa his mistress). Jon on the other hand is the brooding, solemn, plain-featured bastard, sharing no traditional qualities with that of the typical hero. That is to say, he's about as far from Rhaegar as you could get. And yet, it is Jon who commits himself to defending and protecting those who cannot (Sam, the wildlings, Alys Karstark) because that's who he is. No songs are sung for the men of the Nights Watch, he doesn't gain anything by protecting those others might deem weak, unworthy, or exploitable, but he does it anyway. Jon does not look nor act the part, but the strength of his moral character is what distinguishes him as the unconventional hero of the story.

I would also draw a comparison between the legend of Azor Ahai sacrificing his wife Nissa Nissa and Rhaegar's "sacrifice" of Lyanna, to bring about the third head of the dragon he thought necessary to save the world. After reading @/stormcloudrising's phenomenal metas on Sansa's connection to Nissa Nissa/the Amethyst Empress, I believe the idea of sacrifice will appear again in relation to Jon's character arc. Many in the fandom have speculated that AA/NN and the Bloodstone Emperor/Amethyst Empress are one and the same, the former featuring the sacrifice of a wife, the latter a usurpation of a sister. Sansa already occupies the (false) position as Jon's sister, while Jon has refused to usurp her rights as heir to Winterfell. However, with Jon's parentage reveal, the opportunity of a Jon/Sansa romance becomes possible, potentially elevating her to the status of love interest. And, if we're going with the NN/AE are the same theory, it would mean she occupied the role of both sister and wife. As for Rhaegar, his prophecy obsession is what led to him endangering Lyanna, placing his need for the third dragon above her own safety, ultimately killing her. Jon spends a good chunk of ADwD with Stannis, a claimant to the title of AA/the Prince that was Promised, who similarly struggles with the question of sacrificing one life to save the world, "What is the life of one bastard boy against a kingdom?” (ASoS) To which we already know the answer, Everything. Stannis, like Rhaegar, will fail the moment he sacrifices Shireen to fulfill his "greater purpose". Daenerys is also a claimant to the title, and we will likely see a contrast between how she and Jon approach being Rhaegar's heirs and inheritors of the prophecy. Stannis will lose everything after Shireen's death, the same as Rhaegar when he left Lyanna to die, condemning House Targaryen to death in the ensuing war. Jon will likely face a similar decision of sacrifice upon discovering he could be the subject of prophecy that consumed his father and once honorable king. And just as he refused to usurp Sansa's claim, he will reject the sacrifice of a loved one (lover perhaps?) as prerequisite to fulfilling his role as AA/TPtwP.

Jon's character always comes back to his identity as a Stark. Discovering his true parentage will undoubtedly be a source of inner conflict, culminating in his decision between Stark and Targaryen (spoiler: its Stark). It's a classic case of sins of the father, and how Jon asserts himself as an individual outside of his father's tainted legacy. Jon being the hero to Sansa and helping her return home would effectively resolve the generational conflict caused by Rhaegar's "kidnapping" of Lyanna away from the North. Rhaegar caused immense amounts of pain to the Stark family through his one act of selfish cruelty, which Jon will rectify through one of loyalty and selflessness. And narratively, Lyanna's son being the one to save her niece and return her to Winterfell would just be so chef's kiss.

#jonsa #jon snow #sansa stark #lyanna stark #anti rhaelya #<- for filtering #asoiaf meta #rhaegar wishes he could be half the man Jon is 🥱#might add some quotes in later too lazy rn lol #next on the agenda is JonSa/NedCat/Wuthering Heights parallels ;)

156 notes · View notes

crimsoncold · 3 months ago

Note

What is pol!Jon?

It a short form tag that stands for political jon. Essentially an explanation theorized and popularized by a number of people in asoiaf/game of thrones fandom in an attempt to explain some of the very questionable if not outright out of character choices that writer's made on game of thrones for Jon Snow in the later seasons concerning his entire storyline since encountering Daenerys.

Essentially its a theory that stands by the idea that the only way Jon's action and choices could make sense were if Jon's interactions with Daenerys and her allies were not of a genuine nature (i.e. he had no genuine loyalty, affection, love, or trust in her or her advisors/army) but rather everything he was doing and saying amounted to him "playing" the game and doing whatever was necessary to gain her help (i.e. her army and dragons) in the war against the dead, but also to keep his family members and subjects safe from Dany's wrath once he brought her north, and potentially even to maneuver/keep himself in a position where he would be close enough to take Daenerys out all together should it prove necessary to eliminate someone who had proved to be an obvious threat (i.e. before she could cause mass murder and destruction via her dragons, or attempt to greviously harm Jon himself or his "siblings"- the latter at least Jon was successful with)

Essentially it holds to the idea that Jon would have had to have clocked Daenerys as a temporarily necessary "evil" but ultimately also a likely a very dangerous person who would have to be carefully managed to keep her on track and from outright imploding and he then acted (i.e. lied) accordingly (honestly not exactly unlike how her own advisors tended to treat her... as someone useful and powerful who they hoped to influence/guide to some desired outcome/ruler while also having to offset her ever present dangerous desire to take the easy road- i.e. screw the consequences wipe out any and all of her "enemies" with dragon fire).

This theory was meant to offer a more sensible and in character explanation for him bending the knee, becoming her lover, him acting as if he believed she really was a good queen or a ruler any different than the several other violent destructive and/or fire-obsessed ones that came before her.

One that wouldn't require the audience to accept that Jon had just suddenly and without explanation had a personality transplant, becoming incredibly foolishly trusting, a exceptionally bad judge of character, and willing to follow and submit to someone who was not just personally disrespectful to him and his family but who also burned countless people alive, is intending to invade westeros, forcefully take independence away from the north, while also directly threatening Jon's own beloved family.

Support for the idea that Jon would never sincerely trust or feel affection for Dany comes from various things such as...

1. The general lack of any affection/passion/happiness being displayed by Jon when interacting with Daenerys. That feels like a very intentional and suspect choice that is unlikely to have solely been the decision of Kit Harrington or simply due to a general lack of chemistry between him and Emilia Clarke. (Storytelling is more than just the performers... other people on set had to have been involved in creating even the possibility of this political Jon narrative)

Just compare scenes of Jon with any number of characters (his Stark siblings- Sansa in particular, Sam or any of his other nightswatch friends, Tormund or even Ygritte) and it seems obvious to conclude that his interactions with Dany lack true happiness/comradery/affection.

2. How many scenes between characters were being framed in the show.. a number of which seemed to point the audience towards the conclusion that something is quite suspect with this whole dynamic between Dany and her Northern and other Westeros Allies.

Serving to foreshadow Dany as an ultimate aggressor and villain for these characters but also currently establishing a noticeable tension- both a jealousy and a sense of isolation...a lack of belonging or trust between Dany and these characters- all of which hints to the idea that Jon was always loyal to the Starks and The North while Daenerys always remained an unaccepted and untrusted outsider, someone that Jon would attempt to placate and manage but never actually endeavored to truly welcome, include, or help integrate into his family or his people (which one may typically expect a man would do for a foreigner lover that he had brought to an unfamiliar place and people to introduce her to his family, his home, his friends, his culture, and his homeland ... that is if said man were actually in love with this woman or had a even a modicum of affection for her).

For evidence see almost any scene with Jon + Sansa + Dany, Dany + Sansa, Dany + the Northerners, Jon + Greyworm.

3. Jon's book or (perhaps to a lesser degree) his established show canon personalities and familial background.

Him having been established as more intelligent and strategic than how he appeared in the later seasons, his protectiveness and nobility, him being at times ruthless, his willingness to compromise his honor when it's necessary for his own life/saftey or that of others... all of which would correspond better to a pol!jon theory than to the idea that he so quickly and inexplicably fell truly in love with, became loyal to, and strangely willingly so passive to a person like Dany.

His previous history and interactions with other villainous characters who choose to use fire for human sacrifice/execution not unlike the way Daenerys does repeatedly (think Stannis or Melisandre, he didn't like them, found their actions abhorrent, he actively worked to oppose them when he could/when it was the right thing to do),

The general history between House Targaryen and Stark (Lyanna's assumed abduction and rape by the brother Dany admires, and the horrific and brutal killing of his Grandfather and Uncle by Dany's King Father, the resulting uprising that Jon's beloved late "father" took part in to overthrow said king) which by itself is enough reason for him not to readily trust any Targaryen

That's all without even looking at Dany's own personal actions that indicate she, much like other various terrible Targ rulers/ancestors is also an incredibly dangerous individual (one unwilling to look to and learn from the past, to unlearn the sense of targaryen superiority she was raised with, or accept the reality of her family members/ancestors, a conqueror who strength lies in her military might and her willingness to kill en masse via dragon fire rather than in an interest in say labouring to earn the loyalty and acceptance of westeros, in handling the details and minutiae of ruling, or striving towards improving her general political acuity).

Lastly because his willingness and ability to infiltrate, manipulate, lie to, and otherwise feign going along with until the time is right to "strike" (while still not actually abandoning his original duty or loyalty) to the people who qualify as an enemey has already been established (including ones he- reluctantly or under coercion- engages with in a romantic or sexual relationship) through his dealings with Ygritte and the other Free Folk.

Essentially fans were unimpressed with the choices and explanations from the writers/showrunners and were trying to come up with their own more reasonable explanation for Jon's later storyline (beyond the simple fact that the show's writing quality in general had suffered in the later seasons, and that the writer's seemed to forget that several houses - including the starks you know the unofficial heart of the story- were significant and that GOT wasn't ever supposed to be the Dany & DRAGONS!!!! Show ft. everyone else) which cumulated in this jon as a political actor (i.e. a strategic manipulator who is working on the behalf of the collective good of the north, or really humanity itself) theory.

So considering all these facts (plus undoubtedly some I couldn't recall simply off the top of my head) a number of fans saw that a reasonable or even somewhat satisfying explanation for Jon's later season's arc/storyline had to be pol!jon... though people may vary on how canon they think this theory is.

Some may think it does make considerable sense and accept it as headcanon but not believe it was an intentional decision by the writers- thus it's something that is applicable in fandom spaces but is not actually a canon theory.

Others believe pol!jon was a storyline that was actually originally planned out and initiated by the writers but was one that would ultimately fall off and never be properly or explicitly addressed in the show itself- or even acknowledged behind the scenes.

Explanations for this generally are various (unconfirmed and speculative) theories that it was scrapped because the show had second thoughts because....

a) Perhaps the show wasn't interested in or able to devote enough time to properly focus on Jon's character arc in the last leg of the show (not at all unlike the treatment of several other major characters), so this storyline wasn't explicity kept up

b) Maybe because they wanted to make Dany's downfall some supposed huge exciting twist for the audience and thus could no longer have an established heroic and generally liked character explicity be shown as as treating Dany as a villain so far in advance from her downfall as it could raise questions on Dany's ultimate role in the series potentially ruining their oh so amazing twist,

C) More cynically speaking it could have been from a desire to avoid any early on backlash from the large, very invested, and profitable, dany-stan/targ centric/jonerys part of fandom who were banking on a "happy" ending with Dany successfully taking power, being accepted in westeros (and the north with Jon as her consort), making for a glorious return of the dragons and a full targ restoration in Westeros with good queen Dany who would be beloved by all (regardless of the atrocities she enacts with her wmd on those she deems her enemies or any potential Nephews whose claim to the IT would supersede hers).

Having an explict pol!jon story being properly built up over the later seasons would certainly make it harder to sell that fantasy for the die hard dany/targ fans and could have meant viewship would have suffered...(i.e. there would be enough potential backlash coming from the finale what with Dany's down fall and Jon's role in her death... why risk having any prematurely which could effect earlier ratings/reviews/viewership/etc. when instead they could scrap what remained of that storyline and keep targs stans and targ favoring HBO staff happy for a little while longer)

... or

D) perhaps pol!jon was a halfheartedly planned out and clumsily executed storyline that would become abandoned as an extension of the writer's getting cold feet around the idea of a Jonsa romantic pairing (this may seem a stretch but I find there are some compelling arguments that the show may have been in the know of a book!jonsa endgame and even considered having a show!jonsa endgame only to abandon what they deemed too unpopular a pairing.

Pol!jon is something that would have enhanced the Jonsa undertones that remained present in the show .... i.e. such a theory could amplify the canon strange tension/jealousy exhibited between the three characters as well as the canon aspect of Dany being a threat to Sansa's safety being brought up several times ultimately adding further motivation for Jon to assassinate Dany... all of which would have then been paired with the explicit fact that Jon never felt actual loyalty or love for Dany if the show had confirmed pol!jon... this might have leaned too hard in the direction of jon and sansa as a potential romantic couple an idea that the show was not exactly fully committed to exploring or implying

#asoiaf/got #jon snow #jon as a political actor (a strategic manipulator working on the behalf of the collective good of the north/westeros)#not a devoid of personality yes man blindly trusting a dangerous invader and willingly going along with her every whim #asoiaf/got meta #pol!jon #long and rambly explanation that somehow goes from simply defining pol!jon to preemptively explaining its existence and supporting evidence #anti daenerys targaryen #anti jonerys #Crimson Cold thoughts #not the focus but for filtering->#jonsa #jonsa adjacent #anti game of thrones #show critical #anti targ stans #anti dany stans

104 notes · View notes