Honestly, the argument over Lyanna’s consent could easily be settled by answering only four questions:
Was her consent voluntary?
Was her consent free?
Was her consent informed?
Was her consent ongoing?
I’m
going to set aside Lyanna’s age for now despite how this alone invalidates
any argument for consent since Lyanna was a minor even by Westerosi
standards and thus incapable of giving consent. But I know that people
will come out from the woodworks claiming that “this was how things were
back then” which is factually incorrect,
and “we shouldn’t apply our modern world’s rules to medieval period”
which…. why shouldn’t I? The text calls Lyanna a “child-woman” and goes a long way in establishing her youngness, powerlessness and impulsiveness. It
shows how a somewhat similar “relationship” between Cersei and Lancel – which
also includes a fucked up power dynamic and an older “partner” using the
younger one’s naivete for their own purposes – was devastating to
Lancel’s psyche. We argue about the skewness of DanyDrogo and what it
means for the definition of their relationship, we argue about how
Cersei and Lancel’s relationship could not be considered consensual despite Lancel
saying yes. So why should I ignore the same considerations when it comes
to Lyanna and Rhaegar?
However, let’s put that aside for a little
while as we try to answer the above questions. Consent is not just
about saying yes: for Lyanna’s consent to be valid and accepted, it had
to be voluntary, free, informed and ongoing, otherwise it was not
consent. But did these adjectives truly apply to Lyanna’s situation?
Was Lyanna’s consent voluntary?
Or
did it involve any form of coercion, manipulation or pressure? Was it
given on an equal ground that allows Lyanna to give consent without
feeling any pressure or compulsion to do it?
From the very start,
the power imbalance makes it close to impossible for Lyanna to give a
voluntary consent. She was in a very vulnerable position: a 14 years old
maid faced by an adult crown prince and his loyal Kingsguard, being trumped on account of both age and rank. The power dynamic is heavily skewed in Rhaegar’s favor here, which not only casts
shadows on Lyanna’s assent but makes her ability to even express it
in doubt since the situation would put tremendous pressure on her,
simply based on the difference in age and rank.
But it goes beyond that. Oftentimes when the topic of consent is raised, it’s either the
circumstances under which Lyanna disappeared or her experience at the
Tower of Joy that are the subject of discussion. But I want to start a
bit earlier than that, namely at the Tourney of Harrenha,l since we can’t
really separate the events of the tourney from what happened next, not
if we want to have a more thorough examination of this plot.
Rhaegar’s
actions at the tourney are not usually discussed wrt Lyanna’s consent,
even though they are actually the first clue that something is entirely
wrong with this scenario. Much has been said about how dumb a political
move Rhaegar’s crowning of Lyanna was; how it broke chivalric code and
alienated two paramount families in one stroke while severely offending a
third; how it was an insult to the honor of Lyanna and House Stark, etc, but
not much about why Rhaegar chose to do it in spite of all these
considerations. What did he hope to achieve with this stunt that posed
an insult to both his wife and Lyanna, and that framed the latter as a
royal mistress? Many people – myself included – have attributed that to
an ill-fated attempt to reward Lyanna for her actions as the Knight of the Laughing Tree or even a nod of
respect to her valor, but the thing is that Rhaegar was not unaware of
the implications of his actions. He couldn’t have been ignorant of the
insult he was dealing Lyanna, the Starks, and Robert and so if this was
genuinely meant as only a reward or an acknowledgement of Lyanna, it defeated its
purpose. You do not show respect to someone by publicly sullying their
honor. Now I’m
of the opinion that Rhaegar’s interest in Lyanna as the mother for his
third child started at Harrenhal and before he found out that Elia could
not have more children, so in light of that, what did Rhaegar have
to win by declaring his designs on Lyanna so publicly, something that
could only ever make it harder for him to have her? What purpose did
that stunt serve and how does it fall in line with anything we know of
Rhaegar? I find it very hard to believe that he committed such an
outlandish blunder without a purpose and for absolutely no pressing reason. That
crowning must have served Rhaegar’s interests somehow, otherwise he
wouldn’t have risked so much doing it.
The only answer I
can find lies with Lyanna herself, lies in the theory that Rhaegar’s actions were designed to
appeal personally to Lyanna. Through her actions as the Knight of the
Laughing Tree, Rhaegar knew her to be someone who put stock in honor and
rules of chivalry so he controlled the image he presented to her from
the get go. Rhaegar was a part of chivalric culture and he knew the
importance of symbol and image politics; he probably already planned to
use his chivalric image to appeal to the gathered lords as a better
alternative for Aerys, but instead he used it to shape Lyanna’s opinion
of him to guarantee a favorable outlook that would later help him
convince her to run away with him. Rhaegar knew the worth of chivarlic
action, one of its cornerstones being the crowning of queen of love and
beauty at tourneys. By crowning Lyanna, Rhaegar projected to her an
image of the chivalric prince who cherished her actions as the Knight of
the Laughing Tree and sought to honor them, a complete opposite to what
Robert would have done.
It’s also worth noting that the crowning fits
perfectly into the romanticized idea of courtly love that is widely
regarded as pure and ennobling (and that includes the in-universe
view. Look at how fond the singers are of the story of Queen Naerys and
Prince Aemon the Dragonknight) which is something that must have
appealed to a maid of fourteen with romantic inclinations who cried upon
hearing Rhaegar’s song. That,
in and of itself, is a strike against Rhaegar imo. He knew what his
actions really meant and what they implied to the gathered lords. He
knew he was breaking chivalric code and dealing a grave insult to many
people, but he still chose to use a romantic chivalric notion to play on Lyanna’s
naivete, romanticism and even her sense of honor, and to
project an image to her that, while not completely false, is still not
honest. This was not simply a matter of Rhaegar appreciating Lyanna’s
spirit, or even falling in love with her; he had ulterior motives
driving his action to the point where he chose to insult so many people
to ensure his objective: making Lyanna Stark enamored with the idea of
him as someone who would not stifle her or force her into a specific
box. Which, of course, was a lie.
That brings me to the circumstances of Lyanna’s disappearance from the
Riverlands. While I do not think that Rhaegar took Lyanna by force,
manipulating her into saying yes isn’t exactly a development. In all
probability, Rhaegar projected an image of himself as someone who was
granting Lyanna a choice, but while I do not believe that was true (more on that later), what mattered was that she believed that she could make her own
decision, as opposed to being forced into a relationship with
Robert. Lyanna was headstrong and
free-spirited. She did not want to marry Robert and expressed her qualms
to Ned, but no one took her opinion into account or cared about her
objections. Her father pretty much owned her and he wanted the match
with Robert so that was it. To be presented by a choice, to think that
she was free to decide whether to stay or to leave, would appeal greatly
to her, not to mention work to distance Rhaegar even more from
Robert in her mind. To Lyanna, Rhaegar respected and even rewarded her
willfulness, and gave her the space to make her own decision and to take
her own life in hand, something that Robert would never do. But that
was, in actuality, just an illusion Rhaegar projected to her.
Under
these circumstances, Lyanna’s consent can not be called voluntary. Not
only did the situation include a good deal of manipulation or, at best, lying by omission, but she was
not in a position to give voluntary consent in the first place due to the power imbalance between them.
Was Lyanna’s consent free?
Free
consent means that the person giving it had the space to say no and to
have their decision respected and honored. If someone isn’t willing to
accept a no from a partner, then there is no freedom of choice in the
first place, and thus consent can not be given.
Again, I go back to the power imbalance that, in and of itself,
invalidates whatever consent Lyanna gave. A person in such a vulnerable
position, under the authority of another, is incapable of giving
consent. Lyanna and Rhaegar were
not on equal ground in any way, shape or form, which muddies her
consent. She could not compel Rhaegar to do anything at any point. She
could not make him leave her alone if she wished. She could not make him
respect her decision if she’d said no. She had no control over where
she was going or how long she stayed there. She was in a situation that
she could not get out of if she wanted to. What kind of consent could she
give under these circumstances? A person in that unbalanced power
situation can not give consent, plain and simple.
Secondly, did Lyanna have the space to say no and have it be respected? Would Rhaegar have simply left her alone had
she refused him? No freaking way. Rhaegar was after his third head of
the dragon and he was not going to turn around and find another to
father his third child on that easily. For whatever reason, he believed that Lyanna had to be the mother of the third head of the dragon and he
wasn’t going
to take no for an answer. He had two Kingsguard with him to support his plans. That invalidates any consent given from the
onset of this relationship. If Rhaegar wasn’t prepared to accept
Lyanna’s rejection just as much as he was prepared to take her up on her
agreement, then she did not have a choice in the first place,
regardless of whether she understood that or not. That makes whatever
scenario Rhaegar presented to her and the choice he supposedly gave her
only a pretense designed to get her to agree to go without the need to
physically force her. That is deception. If Rhegar had no intention of heeding Lyanna if her wishes contradicted his, but still made
her think that she
did have the space to say no, then he lied to her and deceived her. Any
consent obtained under these circumstances can not be valid.
Was Lyanna’s consent informed?
Consent
is not just about agreeing to something, it’s knowing fully well what
you’re agreeing to. If you do not know what you’re saying yes to, how
can your consent even count?
This is where I ask how much Lyanna knew about what she was agreeing to.
If Rhaegar, at any point, withheld information from her or lied to her
– whether outright or only by omission – he’d have rendered her
incapable of consenting to anything. For Lyanna to make an informed
decision, she needed to know about the prophecy and that Rhaegar
primarily wanted her as a vessel for a prophecy child. She needed to
know that Rhaegar’s plans included spiriting her to a tower in Dorne and staying there till he got his prized child. I’ve seen some
arguments that Lyanna did know about the prophecy, but come on; she was a
teenager trying to flee an unwanted marriage to someone who would have
forced her to live by his beliefs.
What 14-year-old rebels against
being subjugated to one man’s whims only to run to another knowing he
would subjugate her to his whims?
What 14-year-old thinks it’s a swell
idea to be an incubator for a savior? What 14-year-old thinks it’s a
good idea to endanger her life in a high risk pregnancy in the middle of
no where for something that sounds like legends and fiction? What’s with
the belief that of course every single woman in Rhaegar’s life
was ready to risk her well-being, and even her children’s
well-being, for a prophecy that only ever sounded plausible to the
Targaryens?
(And honestly, even if she did know and agree to this, I would still be spitting blood. Because she was fourteen,
and Rhaegar had a responsibility to be the adult in the situation and
recognize how utterly dangerous those plans were for Lyanna’s health. He
was endangering her life by impregnating her, and raising the risk factor by leaving her in an isolated tower in Dorne without proper medical
care.)
On top of that, Lyanna needed to know that she would
not be able to have any contact with her family for as long as Rhaegar
deemed necessary. She needed to know how utterly difficult it would be
to get a marriage between her and Rhaegar recognized and what that means
for her position in Rhaegar’s life. She needed to know that Rhaegar’s
plans included vanishing completely and forcing her family
into a confrontation with Aerys.
So did she know any of that? No? Then she did not
know what she was agreeing to. She couldn’t make an informed decision
because she did not have all the information necessary to see the
complete picture. You can not consent to what you do not know.
Was Lyanna’s consent ongoing?
It’s
not enough for her to say yes one time. Saying yes to leaving with
Rhaegar is not a blanket consent to everything that happened afterwards.
Did Lyanna agree to being spirited away to Dorne? Did she agree to
staying in Dorne while Rhaegar left for the capital? Did she agree to be
made to give birth in the Tower of Joy?
Lyanna’s experience at
the Tower of Joy is frankly disturbing. By taking her to Dorne, Rhaegar
effectively isolated her from everyone she knew and made her completely
dependent on himself and his Kingsguard for everything, including
information, which is made even muddier by the fact that Dorne was
Elia’s home which means it was an unfriendly territory to Lyanna, the
woman who Rhaegar dishonored Elia with. The information we have about
the events starting from Brandon and Rickard’s murder paints a very ugly
picture of what happened in that tower, because there is no way Lyanna
would be content to simply remain at the Tower of Joy after knowing that
her father and brother died as a result of an action she took. Even
arguments that Lyanna might not been able to leave due to pregnancy
complications can not account to the pesky fact that Rhaegar only left
Dorne to fight in his father’s name against Lyanna’s surviving family,
and that Lyanna would never be alright with that.
So we
have a couple of options as to how this story went: 1) Rhaegar did not tell
Lyanna about Rickard and Brandon, and she only found out sometime after
he left, which means he withheld information and she had no say in the
matter, or 2) Rhaegar did tell her but either pressuredmanipulated her
into staying, or outright prevented her from leaving, regardless of her
wishes.
Neither scenario is particularly a riveting character
endorsement of Rhaegar, neither do they bode well to any argument that
Lyanna stayed in Dorne willingly.
I’ve always found arguments
that Lyanna accepted Rhaegar’s decision to declare for his father both
illogical and infuriatingly minimizing to Lyanna’s character. One of the
few things we know about Lyanna is that she defended a stranger simply
because he was her father’s man, and because she could not abide the
injustice of three squires ganging up on him. She went on to defend
Howland’s honor and rode in a tourney specifically so she could get
justice for him. This is the girl who Ned described as having iron
underneath her beauty, who obviously believed in family values, honor,
justice and Northern nationalism. Assuming that she would be accepting
of Rhaegar taking the field against her surviving family in the name of
the king who murdered her father and brother flies in the face of any
character motivation we ever glimpsed of her, not to mention blatantly
ignores the fact that she was screaming for her brother as the
Kingsguard met him sword-to-sword to prevent him from reaching her, or that she clearly trusted Ned and wanted him by her side.
Do
not erase Lyanna’s experience at the Tower of Joy: isolated, pregnant,
alone, dependent on Rhaegar and subject to his will, powerless to change
her situation, forced to remain behind as the father of her child took
up arms against her beloved brother who only rose to demand justice for
their murdered father and brother, left to the “protection” of Rhaegar’s
Kingsguard who were willing to kill her own brother on their prince’s
orders despite how clear it is that Lyanna trusted Ned implicitly. None
of that speaks of consent, or even of an ability to give consent.
In conclusion:
I
think we’re having the wrong argument when it come to Lyanna’s story
with Rhaegar: the point of examination should not focus on whether
Lyanna agreed to run away with Rhaegar, or even whether she married him
or not, but rather on the validity of her consent. Saying yes is
not good enough under these circumstances, not where there are plenty of
considerations that undermine her consent, not least of which being a
teenager completely under Rhaegar’s power. We need to talk more about
what Lyanna’s agreement truly means and how it redefines her
relationship with Rhaegar. No matter how much we try to swing it, Lyanna
was 14 and being “courted” by an older and more experienced man
entirely capable of manipulating and coercing her, even if he did not
use violence for it. The fact that she almost certainly did not know his
true purpose in pursuing her (i.e: getting a child out of her for the
prophecy) makes her consent even more dubious: Rhaegar withheld information
about Lyanna and so whatever dubious consent she made was muddied even
more by him deliberately making her unable to make an informed decision.
And that’s just the surface level of this. This might have gotten her
to the impulsive decision of marrying in front of a heart tree (as I
believe things went) but the fact remains that agreeing to that is not
the same as agreeing to isolation in Dorne, to remaining in Dorne while
Rhaegar left to fight in Aerys’ name, and to be kept away from her
remaining family by the sword even as she screamed for her brother.
Inspired by this post, here’s a graphic and a link roundup:
No new content Sept 1 2017, in protest of Tumblr @staff‘s complete lack of effort to take any action to control rampant white-supremacist hate speech on this platform.
(There’s even a lovely write-up of it from this very month: Nazis On Tumblr Are Attempting To Make White Supremacy Hip.) (There’s a change.org petition about it too, which has a nice write-up of exactly how much absolutely-nothing Tumblr @staff are willing to do about egregious hate speech.) (No, I’m not involved with either of those links, nor the original post I’m referecing above, I just thought I’d Google it before I made a graphic. I know very little about this but it all seems pretty gross, now doesn’t it.)
I’m posting this now, then I’ll put it in my queue on the 1st and have that be the only thing that posts on that day (for those of us who can’t shut our queues down easily, that’s a solution). And then, no posts, no replies, no chats, no inbox, no messages, no visits to the site for the duration of the 1st in my timezone.
[Image description: On a blue background, white bold text says: “9/1/17 Tumblr Strike: This blog is posting no new content to protest Tumblr’s unwillingness to take action against white nationalist hate speech”]
THANK YOU FOR THIS!!!
And for people who are wondering about timezone, I’m suggesting that since the Tumblr office is in New York, we use that timezone.
(And to everyone believe I’m so naive as to think a one-day boycott will stop it – c’mon. I know that. I’m trying to bring attention to this very serious issue, that’s it.)
Quick reminder that the month of August has 31 days and this boycott starts on Friday.
The time zone in New York is Eastern Standard Time so if everyone wants to do this over the same 24 hours, you can compare the time zone you’re in to the eastern one at midnight. For example, if you are in Mountain Standard Time like myself, your boycott will start at 10:00 p.m. on August 31st and end at the same time the next day.
Given how angry Twitter makes me by not doing this, it’s only consistent to extend the same logic over to Tumblr.
So yeah, I’ll take a one-day break to help spread the word. See you on Saturday.
Auli’i Cravalho is joining Darren Criss at Elsie Fest this fall and JJJ can hardly stand the wait!
The Moana starlet, who is currently filming her new series Rise in New York City, will be joining Darren, Lea Michele and many more at the annual event, which “known as the Coachella of show tunes” in the Big Apple in October.
2017 Elsie Fest will take place on Sunday, October 8th in NYC’s Central Park beginning at 5pm.
Elbert Arryn is one of the question marks of that era that we do not have any answer to. His status as Jon Arryn’s heir should have granted him a more prominent role in the pre-rebellion history beyond the knowledge that he existed and died with Brandon. The Southron Ambitions bloc was planned as a generational alliance with Ned’s generation being the linchpin grounding it through fostering and marriage so Elbert’s conspicuous absence in those plans stands out like a sore thumb. He wasn’t completely shut off by any means: the fact that he was a part of Brandon Stark’s wedding entourage and that he later accompanied him to King’s Landing to seek out Rhaegar suggests that Elbert had a good relationship with Brandon, and he was dispatched by Jon Arryn to attend Brandon’s wedding to Catelyn as a representative for his lord uncle which also helps to integrate him in the network of personal relationships the elder statesmen were building between their children. However, that seems to be the extent of Elbert’s involvement in the older generation’s plans. We do not hear of any marital plans for him, and he is mysteriously absent from any of Robert’s or Ned’s reflections on this period. While Elbert was hardly the only unpromised person within the SA bloc, he was 1) the only marital pawn Jon Arryn had to use for alliances, 2) heir presumptive to a family hard-pressed for male heirs, and 3) almost certainly a man grown when he died, so the lack of mention of any marital designs for him that serve Jon Arryn’s purposes strikes me as weird. But since absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence, it might very well be that Jon did have plans for Elbert but we just haven’t heard about them due to the lack of a PoV on the Arryns, and because these plans were rendered moot anyway with Elbert’s death. The fact that there was no brides left within the bloc prior to the planned betrothal between Jaime and Lysa falling through might have also contributed to the lack of info of Elbert’s marriage prospects.
(I do keep wondering if perhaps Jon Arryn had his eyes on Cersei for Elbert, or even if Elbert’s journey to Riverrun had an additional purpose in making him meet with Lysa. The latter would be entirely too ironic but also parallel the BrandonCatelynNed situation to an extent.)
What really puzzles me when it comes to Elbert, though, is that we do not know what relationship, if any, he shared with Robert and Ned, which weirdly does not fly with the objectives of the SA bloc. The elder statesmen were obviously keen on promoting friendships and bonds among the next generation; Rickard Stark seemingly went one step further in encouraging his heir to form friendships with sons of prominent families in the Vale and Riverlands, not only with Elbert Arryn but also with Jeffory Mallister and Kyle Royce, so how does Elbert’s absence in Ned’s or Robert’s recollections figure in that? Shouldn’t Jon Arryn take care to encourage a friendship between his heir and his foster sons?
It might be that Elbert wasn’t actually raised in the Eyrie but rather resided with his mother, but he was still heir presumptive to the Vale and Jon Arryn must have taken some measures to train him as such, necessitating Elbert’s presence in his lord uncle’s court, and exposure and at least a degree of familiarity between him, and Robert and Ned. I honestly do not see how Jon Arryn, invested as he must have been in encouraging personal
relationships among the next generation, could neglect to promote a
three-way friendship between Robert, Ned and Elbert to ground the
alliance between the three kingdoms even after Jon himself passed.
Perhaps there was simply an age difference between them that made forging a bond between the three harder, but Elbert was one of Brandon’s companions, and Brandon was only one year older than Ned and the same age as Robert, so age can not account for that. Could Jon have thought that the connection to Brandon was sufficient enough? I doubt it. Encouraging a friendship between Elbert and Jon’s two wards would be a natural progression of affairs, not to mention infinitely easier and possible to encourage when all of them were children making for a stronger bond. I do not imagine that Jon would pass on the opportunity of making his heir personally dear to Robert in the way Ned was as well, considering how important a card Robert was.
So yeah, Elbert Arryn is one of the curiosities in the series as far as I’m concerned. I don’t really know if we’d ever get some info on him, though Sansa’s presence in the Vale and the plot about the Arryn inheritance might allow for a mention or some tidbits. I’m not holding my breath though; Elbert was more of a plot device used to frame Jon Arryn’s urgent need for a proven fertile wife to provide an heir, and to show how the rebellion was personal for Jon as well, first losing his nephew to Aerys’ brutality, then being ordered to execute his two foster sons to satisfy the king’s paranoia. So I’m not sure GRRM is all that interested in giving us more about Elbert.
Textual analysis. My starting and ending point always lies with the text and what it’s telling me.
I never have a conscious method of reading when I start a book; I do not
go in deciding that everything that the author says does not count, or,
alternatively, seeing his interviews as something that trumps the
actual text. It’s the text that has my attention and that forms my
understanding of the author’s point.
More often than not, when I say “GRRM makes a point” or “GRRM argues”
it’s not a direct quote from Martin that I’m relying on but rather the
themes and motifs he is depicting in his story, which is what I personally use to argue that yes, asoiaf is not grimdark but is actually a rather hopeful story. It’s not a matter of authorial intent as much as it is a matter of analyzing the text itself. I don’t know what Martin said about what kind of story asoiaf is (I’ve never finished So Spake Martin and I’m very bad at following his interviews or retaining much information when I do read them) I’m simply sitting here with the text, trying to pull threads together and connect them to bigger overarching themes. Understanding Martin’s writing patterns and what kind of writer he is
certainly informs my understanding of the text, but it does not overpower it. Personally, I use Martin’s comments as a complementary addendum to the source material since he offers some additional info or puts some events into perspective. But if what the text is telling me does not match what he is telling me it was meant to convey, though, you bet everything I’m going with the text. The text is what matters.
Usually, when the writer is good, it would be rare to find points of
incompatibility between what they meant to convey with their writing,
and what they actually wrote. Martin is very, very good and thus there
aren’t many instances of incompatibility, but they are a few. For example, he is not the best with dealing with consent issues, so
when he doubles down on the claim that, unlike how it was portrayed on
the show, Dany’s relationship with Drogo was not rape, I’m sure as hell
not going to prioritize what he is saying over the text that, quite
clearly, frames it as rape. Dany was 13, a child by even in-universe
standards, sold into a marriage that she begged her brother not to go
through with. She told Drogo no repeatedly
and only acquiesced after he continued touching her despite her objections till she was aroused. That’s not consensual sex. Dany was not even capable of consenting to sex because she was 13. For someone who did such a good job with depicting how traumatizing Cersei’s rape of Lancel was and who framed it as very, very wrong, it is disappointing that he continues to dance around the fact that Dany was raped by Drogo. But no matter what he says, I’m going with the text.
That said, there are things in the books that garner criticism that actually can’t be attributed to an argument between death of the author vs authorial intent, such as the Dead Ladies Club. What even is Martin’s authorial intent here? What did he want to tell us, that these women did not matter? It’s not a question of the death of the author, it’s that Martin portrayed these women as mere vessels, as victims, as idolized versions of who they were, but never bothered to flesh them out or give them a voice or any interiority. Similarly, the racist writing frequently shown in Dany’s story, and to a lesser extent, in Dorne isn’t due to Martin trying to make a point and failing, but rather uncritical and casual usage of racist tropes prevalent in several genres. I find it difficult to talk about authorial intent here because while I believe Martin did not mean to impregnate his writing with these implications, I don’t see a point to what he actually wrote. Authorial intent isn’t a magical excuse to be used to argue that the author did not intend for X story to come across that bad or with these problematic implications, it’s about the author trying to convey a meaning or a point with his writing that we’re meant to pick up on. I fail to see what Martin meant to say when he wrote the Dothraki or the Ghiscari, or when his portrayal of the Dead Ladies club boiled down to “she died”.