My stance on various ASOIAF conspiracy theories, Part 34

Thursday is theory day, but Friday's the charm this week. Again.

This is the thirty-fourth article of the series. Since there are a lot of theories floating out there and I'm asked often enough what I think of them, I thought I write it down. You can then laugh about me when I am totally proven wrong by "The Winds of Winter" or something like that. Rules are as follows: you put a question about any theory or plot element (really, let's stress "theory" a bit for the sake of interesting questions) either in the comments of any theory post or by mail (stefan_sasse@gmx.de) and I will answer them in an upcoming post. And if you now ask "Stefan, isn't this a shameless rip-off of Sean T. Collin's "Ask me anything"?", I would tell you to shut up, because you are right.

Prepare for part 34. Spoilers for "A Song of Ice and Fire", obviously. 

Will Tyrion take the Vale, he mentions he has an idea of how to do it several times?
I don't think so, simply because I don't see how he could "take the Vale". I think the more interesting question is whether Tyrion should take the Vale. From his perspective, it's of course a sweet piece of revenge, destroying everything the Arryns hold dear. On the other hand, the prospect is terrifying. Tyrion unleashing the mountain clans on the smallfolk of the Vale, letting them burn, rape and pillage while he himself sits atop of the ashes laughing - that's Tyrion taking the Vale, and proving once and for all that he really is a Targaryen and secret bastard of Aerys, creating his own kingdom of ash and charred bones. What has the Vale done to Tyrion? Several of its nobles didn't exactly treat him nicely, but he was practically an enemy. The only ones he has a beef with are the two Arryns, and one of them is already dead, and the other will be soon (but then, of course, Tyrion does also have a beef with Littlefinger). So, I don't exactly look forward to Tyrion making good on a promise he made when in anger and full of spite, but he doesn't have big chances to do what he intended, lacking the army necessary for it.

Is Jon Snow's mother "Tansy"?
No. The most comprehensive and, as I understand it, universally acknowledged explanation for "tansy", the word Hoster Tully murmurs on his death bed, is that he means the plant, which is used as an abortive. Since we know for sure that Littlefinger slept with Lysa (or better, the other way around) when he was suffering from his wounds from the duel with Brandon, and we also know that Lysa got pregnant from him and was forced to abort the child, this explanation is satisfactory. There is no connection between Eddard Stark and a presumed riverlands girl called Tansy, and there is no reason at all why Hoster Tully of all people would cry out her name on his deathbed. His last waking hours were filled with the desperate question of whether Lysa came or wrote, practically begging her forgiveness for ruining her life, never getting it. It's only appropriate that his last words would echo that thorn in his soul and not the answer to a meta-question the fandom obsesses over. 

What is up with Ser Garlan Tyrell's obsession with Tyrion? Almost every time we see him he is praising Tyrion.

Yeah, well, we see him once. The only time Garlan Tyrell talks on-screen is when he praises Tyrion, and that was intended only as the start to a conversation that is rudely interrupted by Joffrey and then completely fucked up by Tyrion himself. So, there might be nothing to it. The question got me thinking, however. Given what we know about the Tyrell political strategy from "A Feast for Crows", it might very well be that Garlan Tyrell tried what Margaery did with Sansa - getting a play at something the Lannisters thought theirs. Seriously, wouldn't it be nice to cultivate Tyrion as a mole, with no other price than simply being nice to him for a change? After all, that's what he wants most in the world, and the Tyrells have already proven that they are really good at that particular game.