Winter Blues Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Et tu, Brute?Or something of the sort. Jon wasn't suddenly attacked for deciding to March a Wildling army to Winterfell. No. The emotions that drove those knives into Jon's back were were brewing from every decision Jon made as LC of the Night's watch. Treason on his vows, they called most of his decisions. Yes, many of his actions were questionable, but the most controversial ones were done outside of the know of Marsh and company (Mance, helping Stannis, the deal with the Iron Bank...). What Marsh called treason is Jon making difficult decisions to face the problems that The Watch is facing at the present. Yes, he said vows to defend the realm of man from bad stuff, and yes, over time, the bad stuff included the Wildlings (not exactly clear on if the vows were originally created to include the threat of Wildlings, or just the Others). However, times have changed and the nature of the Night's Watch's vows should have changed with them. "For the watch," they shouted as they stabbed him, but what they were protecting were the vows of the Watch from the past. I'm not arguing that Jon was right in half of what he did, but that the Night's Watch and their vows have taken a different meaning in the context of what Westeros is now facing in the WW. Perhaps one in which they were originally created. (I'm a believer of the theory that the Last Hero and his band of buddies were the NW. Sue me.) What do you guys think?ETA: Yes, I know he was about to march to Winterfell and he should have faced a vote on his fate after that treason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Lannister Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Jon had a hard job. Basically when Stannis arrived to save them from the Wildlings, the Night's Watch became a de facto vassal of Stannis. Jon's had to adjust to this reality while still preserving the polite fiction that the Watch is a neutral and independent entity. I don't doubt Bowen means well. But he really hasn't thought it through at all. Going to Winterfell was a blatant abandonment of his vows, one Jon has demonstrated a willingness to do, by putting his family over the Watch. But as mentioned the discontent had been slowly boiling over for awhile before that. Bowen, Alliser or some other "traditionalist" as Lord Commander likely would've been very quickly replaced by Stannis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fire Eater Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Marsh's problem is that he is a traditionalist, and fails to see the bigger picture. The wildlings seem more a threat to him than the Others, the threat for whom the NW was originally found to defend against. ETA: Yes, I know he was about to march to Winterfell and he should have faced a vote on his fate after that treason.. Going to Winterfell was a blatant abandonment of his vows, one Jon has demonstrated a willingness to do, by putting his family over the Watch. But as mentioned the discontent had been slowly boiling over for awhile before that. Bowen, Alliser or some other "traditionalist" as Lord Commander likely would've been very quickly replaced by Stannis.The Boltons threatened the life of the LC, and if Jon didn't go to him they would come to him eventually and put everyone at CB at risk. Jon had little choice in that. My only criticism is that he should have consulted with his officers of the NW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Led Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 The Boltons threatened the life of the LC, and if Jon didn't go to him they would come to him eventually and put everyone at CB at risk. Jon had little choice in that. My only criticism is that he should have consulted with his officers of the NW. Yeah, if he had been like "Yo, this dude be threatenin' our watch", I think the others would have been more likely to support him in going to attack... or they would have accused him of forging the document to pursue his own ambition. The problem with many of the old officers of the Watch is that they were way too bound by tradition and failed to see the changes that were needed + that they really could not do anything except what Stannis allowed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neds Secret Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Jon realised long ago that the others were a bigger threat than the wildlings, he just didn't communicate this reality well enough to Bowen Marsh and company, and they attacked him out of fear and ignorance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
denny717 Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Bowen marsh definetly didn't think, or care of the possible reprocusions of his actions. Jon was the piece of a puzzle that held everything else around them together. Without him, the wildlings inside the castle and the watch are back to being enemies. There's also the queens men, who have officially provoked the wildlings by attacking wun wun. Possibly bowen was working in unison with someone in charge of the queens men. (Selyse? ) this seems likely to me, because otherwise he's outnumbered. Also attacking wun wun then stabbing jon seemed like a weak attempt at removing the most deadly of their enemies before a battle ensues.At the same time, that's pretty hipocritical of him, considering allying with these people is one of the reasons he's stabbing jon.So I would guess he and the nights watch loyal to him were working on their own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bastard of Walton Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 By marching South to defeat Ramsey, Jon was still honouring his vows to defend the Wall. The Watch couldn't defend against the Others if they where attacked from behind at the same time. Bowan & his cronies didn't see the bigger picture & because of that the Wall will/Has fell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northbound3.0 Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 What they got wrong, was leaving him a live! Now, one of three things are going to happen to them. The most logical, is that they become Ghost Chow. Or, Mel has some new fuel for her night fires. My personal favorite is that Wun Wun, changes his vegan diet up and eats fresh crow!All jokes aside and Fire Eater touched on it a bit, is Marsh's backwards thinking. He reminds me of this growing movement in my country, where a certain portion of the population is pining for a return to how life was like in the 1950's. It was wonderful for white males....not so much, minorities and women. These people and Marsh, have a serious lack of progressive logic and pragmatism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hos the Hostage Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 I still haven't put down the theory that Melisandre is behind the assassination, for whatever secret goal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mythrel Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Jon realised long ago that the others were a bigger threat than the wildlings, he just didn't communicate this reality well enough to Bowen Marsh and company, and they attacked him out of fear and ignorance I felt this way so much through later Jon Chapters. Everytime he spoke with Marsh I was thinking," please just make your point better and wash Bowen marsh over a little more." I read post recently where someone compared his lack of interpersonal and political awareness to the actions of Rhaegar. It's very frustrating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winter Blues Posted March 25, 2015 Author Share Posted March 25, 2015 I felt this way so much through later Jon Chapters. Everytime he spoke with Marsh I was thinking," please just make your point better and wash Bowen marsh over a little more." I read post recently where someone compared his lack of interpersonal and political awareness to the actions of Rhaegar. It's very frustrating.I think he gave his officers too much credit as far as critical thinking goes. Oddly, it plays out to be one of the big motifs of the series, Old traditional order v. The new, younger, more progressive order.One of the most fascinating parts of the series is how the "Old order" High Lords (Tywin, H. Tully, N. Stark, even LC Mormont) are dying and the younger generations are now able to make changes necessary and relevant to them. It reminds me of Jaime's fever dream and the White Bill telling him he was vowed to protect and die for the King no matter what. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MyLittleFinger Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 The vows say "I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls." Where in that says that he can lead a Night's Watch force of volunteers and wildlings against the lawful Warden of the North? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tagganaro Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 The vows say "I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls." Where in that says that he can lead a Night's Watch force of volunteers and wildlings against the lawful Warden of the North? I'd definitely put lawful in quotes. The Boltons are only Wardens based on 2 levels of deception- A fake Baratheon in King's Landing and a fake Arya in Winterfell. I'd also add that the "Warden" just threatened the NW and its commander asking for hostages that the NW couldn't possibly produce (Reek and "Arya"). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winter Blues Posted March 25, 2015 Author Share Posted March 25, 2015 I'd definitely put lawful in quotes. The Boltons are only Wardens based on 2 levels of deception- A fake Baratheon in King's Landing and a fake Arya in Winterfell. I'd also add that the "Warden" just threatened the NW and its commander asking for hostages that the NW couldn't possibly produce (Reek and "Arya").Yep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MyLittleFinger Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 I'd definitely put lawful in quotes. The Boltons are only Wardens based on 2 levels of deception- A fake Baratheon in King's Landing and a fake Arya in Winterfell. I'd also add that the "Warden" just threatened the NW and its commander asking for hostages that the NW couldn't possibly produce (Reek and "Arya"). Tommen is King. His word is law. He signed that Roose Bolton was the Warden of the North. Ramsay Bolton married Arya Stark. The Warden didn't threaten the Night's Watch. His son made a request. Jon Snow violated his oath sending Mance Rayder to steal Arya Stark and bring her back to the Wall. Why should Ramsay be in trouble for catching him breaking his oath? Let alone his word that he had killed the King Beyond the Wall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthGirl Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 I am always thinking that they should have just let him go and wait for him to die en route for Winterfell.Also, basically Marsh was freaking out because he was scared of what the Lannisters would do if the Watch kept being friendly with Stannis as well as having chosen for LC Ned Stark's bastard/Robb Stark's brother instead Janos Slynt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sambo Shaw Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 The vows say "I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls." Where in that says that he can lead a Night's Watch force of volunteers and wildlings against the lawful Warden of the North? Where in that says ANY of the specific actions a member of NW actually performs? Their vows and jobs are to protect the realms of men. If that means to protect them against attack from the Dreadfort, then that is what they (should) do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitering Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Oh Jon did a good job of communicating what threat the Others were, what Bowen and Co can't see is what value the Wildlings are to stopping the Others. Bowen would have just like to have them all die up north because he has total faith in the Wall to stop the Others and the zombies coming for him. Jon doesn't have the same faith. So, for Bowen, let 60 thousand wildlings die, no problem, for Jon, huge problem. For someone who believes that the Wall will protect them, you can't tell them otherwise, it's a fundamental disconnect that won't sink in on folks like Bowen until the Wall is actually breached by the Others. The other problem is that the Others seem like a north of the Wall problem to Bowen, and that they haven't sent an attack against the Wall yet is seemingly proof to Bowen that they aren't going to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MyLittleFinger Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Where in that says ANY of the specific actions a member of NW actually performs? Their vows and jobs are to protect the realms of men. If that means to protect them against attack from the Dreadfort, then that is what they (should) do. There is no attack from the lawful rulers of the North if Jon doesn't break his oaths by using an oathbreaking king to steal the wife of the heir to the Warden of the North Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thisistherevolt Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 The riddle Varys posed to Tyrion applies here I think. Power is in the hands of people whose lessers believe them to. Marsh and his compatriots believe it to be Tommen. Jon Snow and his faction believe it doesn't matter based on the threat that is coming.That is where Jon messed up. It's also where Marsh really messed up for only looking at one long term problem versus all the small ones and large immediate threats.He is also apparently forgetting about an angry giant nearby, effing Melisandre somewhere close, and some wildlings around who have respect for the Stark name and are probably bored and battle hungry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.