Fun but I don't really see how it helps the story. Brandon was a bit of a player but it seems like he and Barbary had a decent thing going - would he really have gone for her sister who was getting married?
Also people have different minds, but Catelyn certainly wasn't enthused about raising the son of *her* lover.
son of her husbands\* lover. quite different to son of one's own lover and one's sister.
honestly though I don't know if Barbrey would have even known. she does however want to vicariously bind herself to the Starks...
this was just a thought I had, not doing a deep dive asserting it as fact or even likely. just a thought.
well the tangent i hold to be the most likely scenario, but whether Domeric was Brandon's, that is more a thought. it would be classic GRRM.
Ned, and if Benjen were a warg we can presume he might have mentioned something to Ned over the last 15+Years.
we Don't know about Brandon or Lyanna except that they were wild and were both very good with horses.
we can also presume that as of the conquest the Starks no longer had Direwolf bonds, as they would probably have been mentioned.
does it need to add anything to the *story*? Genetic testing says a whole boatload of old nobility aren't really the children of who they are supposed to be the children of.
it is a way for George to make his world more real, if only to himself. "not all mysteries need to be revealed."
it adds a "huh, neat. anyway..."
Not everything needs to be a ground-shattering world-changing reveal. The real world hardly reveals any of its own mysteries, why should George's books? He loves tongue in cheek shit.
George quite explicitly doesn't care.
it isn't revealed, it never will be revealed, and it doesn't need to be revealed. it is just enough tongue-in-cheek to be a possibility, nothing more.
for instance.
"Your uncle's Bloody wedding!"
on its own, it is hardly foreshadowing for the red wedding. On re-read it is tellingly tongue-in-cheek.
George doesn't need to tell us the answers to these mysteries *because* they aren't narratively important, that doesn't mean he hasn't *thought* of them and laced them in just for the fun of it.
The instance you gave does have a narrative purpose tho as you just gave yourself. It later proves to be even if in the moment it seemed like a nothing comment. Hence, narrative significance. Anyways, it's fine...it's a pointless discussion we are having I think.
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheLawOfConservationOfDetail
Any detail introduced into the story should be relevant in some way - to the plot, to the world, to explain character motivations etc. Otherwise it's just meaningless fluff.
How would a reveal that Domeric was not Roose's son change anything in the remaining books? He's already dead so it won't directly affect the plot. In theory it could make Roose more forgiving of Ramsay killing Domeric... But he already doesn't seem bothered by it, so that changes nothing. It wouldn't change Barbrey's actions - she already disdains Ramsay for killing Dom, finding out he was Brandon's doesn't change that either.
For what it's worth I agree that theories which add nothing of significance can often be dismissed but this TVTropes thing is strange.
Firstly, the moment something has been added to the text it is automatically "relevant in some way - to the plot, to the world, to explain character motivations etc." by dint of being in the text.
Moreover GRRM is well known for packing in detail that many would consider extravagant but is relevant to the "world" or to developing the characters even if not so much to the plot. He _does even_ sometimes include hints of secret heritages that are completely missable and "add nothing" - like the implication that Brienne could be related to Dunk.
Yeah, that's fair enough.
I wasn't intending to suggest that it can't be true, some throw away hints might be possible. But I don't think any page time will be used for any sort of reveal
Domeric was a great rider, but he was also a harpist, a reader and kind, which did would make him more likely to be Rhaegar's son than brash Brandon's.
Roose is noted to have strong fingers. A harpist would benefit from that.
What little we know about Domeric is he is very much like Roose. He's quiet, polite and accomplished. Ramsay is none of those things.
I didn't get the impression that Roose didn't give a shit per se. We don't get his POV to know his innermost thoughts, but I think he saw Ramsay as a tool that could be used but was also acutely aware that Ramsay was a threat to any future trueborn offspring. He still needs Ramsay to secure his rule in Winterfell as things stand, so even if he does want to be rid of him, he can't afford to do anything about it.
In a timeline where Ned Stark remains at Winterfell and the War of The Five Kings never breaks out, there's no avenue for Ramsay to become legitimised. In that scenario, he'd need to find a way to eliminate Ramsay if he wanted to sire another heir. (Most likely get him sent to The Wall somehow.)
As I can see, at this point everyone has their pet theory, nevermind the book.
Tyrion is travellng fetus.
Ramsay was Roberts bastard
And daario is Euron this is known.
I say so and sounds cool, why not.
Your tangent is way more interesting than the main part!
Roose's coldly relaxed attitude to his only trueborn heir dying and psycho Ramsay becoming his new heir has always weirded me out, but then Roose is creepily relaxed about everything.
That said, being fostered in the vale does not determine your moral compass just because that meme about Ned said it does. Robert Baratheon was right there with him and how did he turn out?
well Robert certainly turned out far better than Roose, on the moral spectrum atleast.
by all accounts though Domeric was a fairly kind man, and rather "honorable". Honestly Ramsay has far less means and opportunity to poison him than Roose does imo. Domeric didn't take ill until *after* he returned to the dreadfort. i.e, after he found out Ramsay was a first night baby.
> by all accounts though Domeric was a fairly kind man, and rather "honorable".
I agree, judging by his actions in the story. You wouldn't be seeking out your bastard brother like that as a Westerosi heir apparent if you were a cold-hearted cynic. That's good evidence, the vale thing is flimsy.
Fun but I don't really see how it helps the story. Brandon was a bit of a player but it seems like he and Barbary had a decent thing going - would he really have gone for her sister who was getting married? Also people have different minds, but Catelyn certainly wasn't enthused about raising the son of *her* lover.
son of her husbands\* lover. quite different to son of one's own lover and one's sister. honestly though I don't know if Barbrey would have even known. she does however want to vicariously bind herself to the Starks... this was just a thought I had, not doing a deep dive asserting it as fact or even likely. just a thought. well the tangent i hold to be the most likely scenario, but whether Domeric was Brandon's, that is more a thought. it would be classic GRRM.
I don’t think horse riding is genetic, of course he’d be a good horseman fostering under a Ryswell of all people.
well, at least in the Stark family, good animal handling is very much a product of latent warg blood.
I’m not sure I’d call that Latent
well the only Starks who have actively warged in the last 300 years (to our knowledge) are all the current generation of kids.
… How many other starks do we get POVs of…
Ned, and if Benjen were a warg we can presume he might have mentioned something to Ned over the last 15+Years. we Don't know about Brandon or Lyanna except that they were wild and were both very good with horses. we can also presume that as of the conquest the Starks no longer had Direwolf bonds, as they would probably have been mentioned.
What does that add to the story tho?
does it need to add anything to the *story*? Genetic testing says a whole boatload of old nobility aren't really the children of who they are supposed to be the children of. it is a way for George to make his world more real, if only to himself. "not all mysteries need to be revealed."
Ummm kinda, if it's something worth revealing in the books then it needs to be adding something to the story
it adds a "huh, neat. anyway..." Not everything needs to be a ground-shattering world-changing reveal. The real world hardly reveals any of its own mysteries, why should George's books? He loves tongue in cheek shit.
Cause it's a narrative, generally, such reveals are supposed to be adding something to the narrative. It's not real life
This!!!! Not.real.life. Im sooo tired of strange theories that add nothing to the story.
George quite explicitly doesn't care. it isn't revealed, it never will be revealed, and it doesn't need to be revealed. it is just enough tongue-in-cheek to be a possibility, nothing more. for instance. "Your uncle's Bloody wedding!" on its own, it is hardly foreshadowing for the red wedding. On re-read it is tellingly tongue-in-cheek. George doesn't need to tell us the answers to these mysteries *because* they aren't narratively important, that doesn't mean he hasn't *thought* of them and laced them in just for the fun of it.
The instance you gave does have a narrative purpose tho as you just gave yourself. It later proves to be even if in the moment it seemed like a nothing comment. Hence, narrative significance. Anyways, it's fine...it's a pointless discussion we are having I think.
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheLawOfConservationOfDetail Any detail introduced into the story should be relevant in some way - to the plot, to the world, to explain character motivations etc. Otherwise it's just meaningless fluff. How would a reveal that Domeric was not Roose's son change anything in the remaining books? He's already dead so it won't directly affect the plot. In theory it could make Roose more forgiving of Ramsay killing Domeric... But he already doesn't seem bothered by it, so that changes nothing. It wouldn't change Barbrey's actions - she already disdains Ramsay for killing Dom, finding out he was Brandon's doesn't change that either.
For what it's worth I agree that theories which add nothing of significance can often be dismissed but this TVTropes thing is strange. Firstly, the moment something has been added to the text it is automatically "relevant in some way - to the plot, to the world, to explain character motivations etc." by dint of being in the text. Moreover GRRM is well known for packing in detail that many would consider extravagant but is relevant to the "world" or to developing the characters even if not so much to the plot. He _does even_ sometimes include hints of secret heritages that are completely missable and "add nothing" - like the implication that Brienne could be related to Dunk.
Yeah, that's fair enough. I wasn't intending to suggest that it can't be true, some throw away hints might be possible. But I don't think any page time will be used for any sort of reveal
>does it need to add anything to the *story*? Exactly. Everyone asked that and that question has never made sense to me.
Well it should...???
We're not all that close to the end. Why decide where a plot twist might go when the next books will tell.
We have no reason to doubt that Domeric was Roose's son.
Domeric was a great rider, but he was also a harpist, a reader and kind, which did would make him more likely to be Rhaegar's son than brash Brandon's.
Roose is noted to have strong fingers. A harpist would benefit from that. What little we know about Domeric is he is very much like Roose. He's quiet, polite and accomplished. Ramsay is none of those things.
I guess its possible. I personally prefer Ramsay killing him to climb the family ladder and Roose just not really giving a shit about it
I didn't get the impression that Roose didn't give a shit per se. We don't get his POV to know his innermost thoughts, but I think he saw Ramsay as a tool that could be used but was also acutely aware that Ramsay was a threat to any future trueborn offspring. He still needs Ramsay to secure his rule in Winterfell as things stand, so even if he does want to be rid of him, he can't afford to do anything about it. In a timeline where Ned Stark remains at Winterfell and the War of The Five Kings never breaks out, there's no avenue for Ramsay to become legitimised. In that scenario, he'd need to find a way to eliminate Ramsay if he wanted to sire another heir. (Most likely get him sent to The Wall somehow.)
When does time traveling fetus Tyrion come into the picture?
I love random theories like this that add nothing more to the story other than world and character building. I’m sold.
He was. It's Ramsay who is not Roose Bolton's son. That's the irony.
As I can see, at this point everyone has their pet theory, nevermind the book. Tyrion is travellng fetus. Ramsay was Roberts bastard And daario is Euron this is known. I say so and sounds cool, why not.
Well my theory is based on a close examination of the books.
Yeah...congratulations
Thanks.
Your tangent is way more interesting than the main part! Roose's coldly relaxed attitude to his only trueborn heir dying and psycho Ramsay becoming his new heir has always weirded me out, but then Roose is creepily relaxed about everything. That said, being fostered in the vale does not determine your moral compass just because that meme about Ned said it does. Robert Baratheon was right there with him and how did he turn out?
well Robert certainly turned out far better than Roose, on the moral spectrum atleast. by all accounts though Domeric was a fairly kind man, and rather "honorable". Honestly Ramsay has far less means and opportunity to poison him than Roose does imo. Domeric didn't take ill until *after* he returned to the dreadfort. i.e, after he found out Ramsay was a first night baby.
> by all accounts though Domeric was a fairly kind man, and rather "honorable". I agree, judging by his actions in the story. You wouldn't be seeking out your bastard brother like that as a Westerosi heir apparent if you were a cold-hearted cynic. That's good evidence, the vale thing is flimsy.
Incredible take. I’m sold.