Jump to content

Ned Stark = inspector Javert


INCBlackbird

Recommended Posts

so I'm a les miserables fan, mostly because of the character of Javert. I find him intrueging though I can't stand him as a person. and I find him to have a lot in common with Ned. they both have wrong principles that they are too stubborn to change. too stuck in their own black and white view to realise the complexity of morality. though both of them have good intensions. what do you all think of this comparison?


Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're going to have to elaborate. You're making a sweeping claim with no evidence.

I didn't make a claim, it's not like I think GRRM based Ned on him or anything. I just kinda see the resemblance between the two characters and since les miserables is a classic most people know, I thought it was interesting to bring up. also because Javert is by most considered the villain of the story (though I wouldn't call him a villain because I only think characters with bad intensions are villains) and Ned is bas most considered the good guy (something I also don't agree with) I think they're both fascinating characters and from the moment I started thinking a little deeper about Ned I saw the similarities with javert. so I wanna know if others on here see it too. what kind of evidence would you want though?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so I'm a les miserables fan, mostly because of the character of Javert. I find him intrueging though I can't stand him as a person. and I find him to have a lot in common with Ned. they both have wrong principles that they are too stubborn to change. too stuck in their own black and white view to realise the complexity of morality. though both of them have good intensions. what do you all think of this comparison?

I'm not very familiar with Les Miserables, but I agree with this in Ned's case. I found Ned's chapters irritating to read to be honest, it seemed like he had blinkers on half the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OP, I think you're stretching. I also find Javert and Ned fascinating, but I don't think there's that much they have in common. A certain whiff of hypocrisy (that each finds painful), ok, and a certain inflexibility, maybe. Other than that, I don't see much in common. I'm not aware of Javert showing any indication of being a loving father, for example, which gives Ned many new dimensions, depending on the kid. Interesting idea, but you'd have to expand on it a lot more to sell me.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't make a claim, it's not like I think GRRM based Ned on him or anything. I just kinda see the resemblance between the two characters and since les miserables is a classic most people know, I thought it was interesting to bring up. also because Javert is by most considered the villain of the story (though I wouldn't call him a villain because I only think characters with bad intensions are villains) and Ned is bas most considered the good guy (something I also don't agree with) I think they're both fascinating characters and from the moment I started thinking a little deeper about Ned I saw the similarities with javert. so I wanna know if others on here see it too. what kind of evidence would you want though?

::sigh::

I find him to have a lot in common with Ned. they both have wrong principles that they are too stubborn to change

This is a claim. Ned has a lot in common with Javert. What do they have in common? Wrong principals and stubbornness.

What "wrong principals"? What are the episodes that show that Javert and Ned are stubborn?

too stuck in their own black and white view to realise the complexity of morality.

Claim: Ned and Javert are stuck in a black and white view of morality.

Is morality more complex then black and white?

What are the episodes that prove that Ned and Javert have this black and white view of morality?

The quick answer from me is that no, I don't think the Ned is similar to Javert. Stannis is like Javert. Unbending. Would Javert give Cersei the chance to escape KL after confessing to twinceason? Would Javert council Arya to forgive Sansa for lying for Joffrey? Would Javert get a sword instructor for Arya? Would Javert give three Kingsguard knights the opportunity to "hey, just walk away and it doesn't need to go down".

Javert is who Jaime and Cersei would like to think Ned is. They hate the fact that he does, or would, look down on them for what they do. So they think of him as some ice cold stick in the mud black/white moral snob so they don't have to feel guilty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed, was ready to say this the second I saw the subject title. :P

Damned if I'll live in the debt of a thief,

Damned if I'll yield at the end of the chase,

I am the Law and the law is not mocked

It's a great fit, lol
Link to comment
Share on other sites

::sigh::

This is a claim. Ned has a lot in common with Javert. What do they have in common? Wrong principals and stubbornness.

What "wrong principals"? What are the episodes that show that Javert and Ned are stubborn?

Claim: Ned and Javert are stuck in a black and white view of morality.

Is morality more complex then black and white?

What are the episodes that prove that Ned and Javert have this black and white view of morality?

The quick answer from me is that no, I don't think the Ned is similar to Javert. Stannis is like Javert. Unbending. Would Javert give Cersei the chance to escape KL after confessing to twinceason? Would Javert council Arya to forgive Sansa for lying for Joffrey? Would Javert get a sword instructor for Arya? Would Javert give three Kingsguard knights the opportunity to "hey, just walk away and it doesn't need to go down".

Javert is who Jaime and Cersei would like to think Ned is. They hate the fact that he does, or would, look down on them for what they do. So they think of him as some ice cold stick in the mud black/white moral snob so they don't have to feel guilty.

I wouldn't call those claims, i'd call them observations. but either way here we go :

wrong principles: javert and Ned both believe that the black and white morality they were taught (in Javert's case this is the law in Ned's case this is the idea that when one swears an oath they have to keep it no matter what) they consider this the ONLY right morality to have, instead of "feeling" what is right and what is wrong they stubbornly hold on to these principles refusing to even consider they could be flawed.

of course morality is a lot more complex then black and white, Jaime said it best : "So many vows... they make you swear and swear. Defend the king. Obey the king. Keep his secrets. Do his bidding. Your life for his. But obey your father. Love your sister. Protect the innocent. Defend the weak. Respect the gods. Obey the laws. It’s too much. No matter what you do, you’re forsaking one vow or the other.” most situations are complex, most people aren't out to hurt others but they get into a situation where they feel trapped with no way out, this should be taken into account not simply the eventual outcome.

do I need to prove this stuff with Javert? isn't that what his entire character is about? when it comes to Ned:

well take for example the part where littlefinger suggests for Ned to bend the knee to Joffrey to avoid war and Ned in his black and white principles says that that is not even an option because it wouldn't be right, though I would think that a person who is not stubbornly set on his own flawed version of right and wrong would think again and conclude that war should be avoided at all cost, because tons of innocent people would die. lawfull king or not.

well I thnk Stannis and Ned are pretty similar, so yeah it goes for stannis as well. and I don't think this is how Cercei and Jaime saw Ned, I think this is how Ned was! yes, maybe they simplified it a little bit, that's what people do, but ultimately Ned was a man of principles who refused to change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't call those claims, i'd call them observations. but either way here we go :

wrong principles: javert and Ned both believe that the black and white morality they were taught (in Javert's case this is the law in Ned's case this is the idea that when one swears an oath they have to keep it no matter what) they consider this the ONLY right morality to have, instead of "feeling" what is right and what is wrong they stubbornly hold on to these principles refusing to even consider they could be flawed.

Wrong. This is completely wrong. Ned does not see the world in black and white.

of course morality is a lot more complex then black and white, Jaime said it best : "So many vows... they make you swear and swear. Defend the king. Obey the king. Keep his secrets. Do his bidding. Your life for his. But obey your father. Love your sister. Protect the innocent. Defend the weak. Respect the gods. Obey the laws. It’s too much. No matter what you do, you’re forsaking one vow or the other.” most situations are complex, most people aren't out to hurt others but they get into a situation where they feel trapped with no way out, this should be taken into account not simply the eventual outcome.

The problem here is that Jaime is not an innocent little flower here. He is speaking in defense of himself. He is no expert in law, but he sure can break them. He may have a point that oaths can be conflicting but his situation with killing Aerys does not fit in this category and he should rightfully be criticized for it.

do I need to prove this stuff with Javert?

Yes. You made the claim and didn't back it up well in the OP.

isn't that what his entire character is about?

Not at all. I think you're blinded in hatred for Ned to even suggest it.

well take for example the part where littlefinger suggests for Ned to bend the knee to Joffrey to avoid war and Ned in his black and white principles says that that is not even an option because it wouldn't be right, though I would think that a person who is not stubbornly set on his own flawed version of right and wrong would think again and conclude that war should be avoided at all cost, because tons of innocent people would die. lawfull king or not.

You can't use this as an example of Ned's wrongdoing. This is on Cersei and Jaime. They usurped Robert by intentionally denying him an heir to pass the crown to and passed their unlawful bastard off as trueborn. They knew the risk of this and did it anyway. Stannis and Jon Arryn's investigation plus Littlefinger's machinations show that a war was in fact going to happen. Ned's offer to Cersei would have prevent thousands of deaths. If you want to put innocent blood on people's hands, start with Jaime, Cersei, Littlefinger, and Varys.

Lawful has a lot to do with it. There is no question that what Cersei and Jaime did was illegal. They knew it and didn't care of the risks. Laws may not always be perfect, but in this case their treason caused at least a three way split between them and the two Baratheon brothers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem here is that Jaime is not an innocent little flower here. He is speaking in defense of himself. He is no expert in law, but he sure can break them. He may have a point that oaths can be conflicting but his situation with killing Aerys does not fit in this category and he should rightfully be criticized for it.

I wasn't saying that Jaime was innocent, I was using his quote because I was asked if morality is complex and I found it a good quote to illustrate that, the fact that Jaime said it or even why he said it is beside the point, because it's still true.

Yes. You made the claim and didn't back it up well in the OP.

spoilers for les mis: ok let's see. Les Miserables is all about Jean Valjean, a good man who made a misstep (because he had no choice) and broke the Law and Javert's obsession with catching him simply because he broke the law and is therefor evil, he refuses to see grey, refuses to acknowledge that men can change. after eventually discovering that those principles he's lived his entire life on are flawed, he commits suicide. so yeah, it's the entire basis of his character.

Not at all. I think you're blinded in hatred for Ned to even suggest it.

what does this have to do with Ned? I was talking about Javert...

Wrong. This is completely wrong. Ned does not see the world in black and white.

You can't use this as an example of Ned's wrongdoing. This is on Cersei and Jaime. They usurped Robert by intentionally denying him an heir to pass the crown to and passed their unlawful bastard off as trueborn. They knew the risk of this and did it anyway. Stannis and Jon Arryn's investigation plus Littlefinger's machinations show that a war was in fact going to happen. Ned's offer to Cersei would have prevent thousands of deaths. If you want to put innocent blood on people's hands, start with Jaime, Cersei, Littlefinger, and Varys.

Lawful has a lot to do with it. There is no question that what Cersei and Jaime did was illegal. They knew it and didn't care of the risks. Laws may not always be perfect, but in this case their treason caused at least a three way split between them and the two Baratheon brothers.

who said it's an example of Ned's wrongdoing? it's not, it's an example of Ned viewing the world black and white... and you just illustrated exactly why. it's not about who's fault it is or isn't. it's about the fact that Ned didn't even consider the choice of peace under a lawfully false king over war, even though the second choice is better for the innocent people who will have to die in this war they have nothing to do with. it's about the fact that Ned sees absolutly no moral ambiguety in this. aka, he views this situation completely black and white.

"there's no question that what cersei and jaime did was illegal" illegal indeed, again, according to the law but the is often not morally right (especially in westeros) the question should be whether or not it was immoral, not illegal, but Ned doesn't concern himself with those things.

btw, i'm not saying Ned is responsible for the war, not at all, the war would have happened either way, but Ned didn't know that and in that moment littlefinger gives him a choice and he calls it no choice at all. that's being stubborn and black and white.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...