Why you shouldn't be celebrating [No Book Spoilers]

[aceluby]

Whoever did murder Joffrey could still get what's coming to them eventually. You are right that this is another example of guest right being broken for political purposes. But that doesn't mean he didn't deserve it. And the comparisons between him and Robb end at that they were both murdered at a wedding. Other than that the two deaths are nowhere near the same. Joff was a monster with no friends and all enemies.

[Annara Snow]

• I disagree about Sansa. She was actually in safe place with Tyrion, although certainly not a loving place. Tyrion cared about her welfare and viewed it as his duty to protect her. Now... well, her fate is in unknown. I will say Dontos the former drunk knight and currently drunk fool is a far less effective protector than Sandor Clegane is to Arya.

:bs: She'd be safer anywhere else. King's Landing is the least safe place in the world for her, not to mention the worst for her emotional well-being. Tyrion can't even protect himself well enough, and he's one of the Lannisters. Being Tyrion's legal wife only makes her even more of a target for Joffrey and potentially Cersei, and Tywin is not the type to be patient for long with Tyrion not putting a baby in her belly and not producing a little Lannister heir to the Winterfell. And even if Tyrion was such a white knight, powerful enough to keep himself and Sansa safe, and entirely free of influence of his powerful and dominant father, Sansa would have always remained a passive, helpless pawn who's utterly dependent on Tyrion's good will, not to mention surrounded by the people who murdered most of her family and forced to sit and act like she's one of them while they're rubbing salt on the wounds.

If Tyrion really cares so much about her well-being, he should have tried to get her far away from King's Landing and his family, and have their forced marriage annulled.

Having read the books and knowing who and more importantly why Joffrey was murdered has colored my perception of the event. Suffice it to say, unless you think Tyrion was actually guilty, Joffrey in dying may do more harm than good.

Knowing how it all ends

- Tywin murdered by Tyrion, Tyrion going to Essos to meet Dany, and House Lannister on the verge of total collapse

, I'm pretty happy about the result.

[Fool of a Book]

There is no indication in the books that either Joff or anyone implicated in his death (no spoilers) is religious, or has previously acted morally in any sense of the word in order for this act to be a conflict. The only "moral" person who could be implicated is Sansa. That this distinction does not matter regarding the sins of "guest right" is what moves the plot along, but we don't have enough information how this matters to the gears that grind GRRM's world.

Sorry OP, but I'm confused. Unless you shine the same moral spyglass on every single death in ASOIAF, this argument falls flat.

[iknownothingjonsnow]

When a good thing happens for a bad reason, I'm still going to celebrate the good thing.

Suck it Trebek.

[RoamingRonin]

You should be sad because Joffrey was murdered, which is the opposite of justice.

Groan.

I only see this being a problem if he was murdered by someone who thought their actions counted as justice. Clearly that's not the case.

[P. frontalis chiripepe]

The OP is trying to apply our real world system of justice and law enforcement to Westeros, which we can't do. There is no systematic way to remove an unjust King. No papers to file. No petitions to be made. No due process. If Joffrey wants to have every woman in King's Landing raped daily, he can. At least according to the 'rules' of Westeros. In their world, until an amendment is made to their core rules regarding the status of Kings, there is little recourse to end the rule of an evil and unjust King aside from acts of murderous treason. Given the context of their world, murdering that type of King is actually a just and morally correct thing to do, in my opinion. To view it as an immoral act of murder is just viewing through the coke bottle glasses of our own modern society.

[six]

:bs: She'd be safer anywhere else. King's Landing is the least safe place in the world for her, not to mention the worst for her emotional well-being. Tyrion can't even protect himself well enough, and he's one of the Lannisters. Being Tyrion's legal wife only makes her even more of a target for Joffrey and potentially Cersei, and Tywin is not the type to be patient for long with Tyrion not putting a baby in her belly and not producing a little Lannister heir to the Winterfell. And even if Tyrion was such a white knight, powerful enough to keep himself and Sansa safe, and entirely free of influence by his powerful and dominant father, Sansa would have always remained a passive, helpless pawn who's utterly dependent on Tyrion's good will, not to mention surrounded by the people who murdered most of her family and forced to sit and act like she's one of them while they're rubbing salt on the wounds.

If Tyrion really cares so much about her well-being, he should have tried to get her far away from King's Landing and her family, and have their forced marriage annulled.

Knowing how it all ends

- Tywin murdered by Tyrion, Tyrion going to Essos to meet Dany, and House Lannister on the verge of total collapse

, I'm pretty happy about the result.

It's hard to discuss this without spoilers, but I agree. Sansa is clearly not safe in KL for all the reasons you mention, but also because she's out of her element, young and vulnerable and she gets played by pretty much everyone. However what happens after Joff bites it

is the fucking worst. I hate how some people seem to believe that being with creepy uncle Pedofinger is somewhat better for Sansa.

[P. frontalis chiripepe]

It's hard to discuss this without spoilers, but I agree. Sansa is clearly not safe in KL for all the reasons you mention, but also because she's out of her element, young and vulnerable and she gets played by pretty much everyone. However what happens after Joff bites it

is the fucking worst. I hate how some people seem to believe that being with creepy uncle Pedofinger is somewhat better for Sansa.

As regards to your spoiler

I think it would be much better for Sansa to be with LF. He's not a pedophile according to Westerosi standards, and her husband in KL is about the same age as LF anyway. But by staying in KL she would have faced the almost certain accusation of conspiracy in Joffrey's murder. Which wouldn't have come out rosy for her.

[Envie]

• Justice is requires a few elements. Acknowledgement of crimes is one. Had Arya shown up in Joffrey's chambers and declared "you killed my father prepare to die," I would have cheered. As it is, Joffrey's death is a mystery.

I've read all your arguments in this debate and find myself asking at the end: "So what would have been a 'justified' death for Joffrey?" In the line I quoted you on, you feel Arya showing up to exact justice against Joffrey would be ok. But like Oberyn's threats to avenge his sister's murder - is this 'justice' or 'vengeance?' ...fine line there. Tricky.

Ok - so ... Are justification and justice even comparable regardless of having the same root word? No, you probably would say not. That's the sticky point of this debate. One might feel 'justified' to take the life of another ... but that's not the same as 'justice' - which as you already discussed, seems to imply law and order. But law and order is defined by the people who make those laws and enact the established order. The rules of Dothraki culture (and coincidentally the acceptance of death at a wedding) are obviously vastly different than the rules in Westeros culture - but still - they make their laws and order and they view it as justice or not.

Joffrey's murderer felt justified in killing him for a number of reasons some of which are blatantly obvious and others which are maybe not so apparent yet.

I do agree the Westeros standard of providing safety to guests at a wedding has been grievously disregarded on two occasions now. I disagree however that we should feel as outraged about it over Joffrey's death as we did Robb Stark's. The circumstances of the muderer's motivations are vastly different and there's just no way around it - Joffrey deserved it and Robb did not. As Sansa confessed, Joffrey was a monster. He would have grown worse as he matured, this is almost guaranteed. The atrocities and sadistic things he's done up to this point were inexcusable and horrific. Yes, I believe some people deserve to die more than others. That's it's own form of justice when it does happen.

[P. frontalis chiripepe]

Is there a source from the texts that implies that a guest harming his host carries the same taboo as a host harming his guest? It doesn't change my stance on this issue, but I was just wondering. I don't remember reading that anywhere.

[flamingothegreen]

I'm not celebrating that Joffrey is dead but I am by no means upset about it.

He was a good character - a love-to-hate type that will leave a hole for someone else to fill. I'll miss Joffrey, but he's someone that inevitably had to go.

Anyway, with the justice issue - is it just or injust? It's certainly not legal and it's definitely disrespectful to do something to the host when you are a guest, but that did not make it injust. Does Joffrey deserve to die? Maybe, maybe not. However, it is not for us to judge whether he deserves to die or not, but moreso it would be the decision of those from the realm. How many characters thought Joffrey's death would be just? In times like that, it probably would be just to kill Joffrey due to the things that he did (things that could be considered legal since he was king). However, I don't think we can view his death while regarding justice at the same time; if you do that, then you would need to take into consideration every act done by every character, "good" or "bad", and determine whether or not said actions are just or not. I understand where you're coming from regarding your conclusions, however I don't agree with them.

Also, Joffrey's death should have both positive and negative repercussions, as would any king's death. We can clearly see that Tyrion is in a horrible position, Cersei is distressed, Sansa is supposedly on the run (which isn't necessarily bad), and many many people are going to be happy. o: Not everything will be bad for characters, and some will definitely get some good out of Joffrey's death.

[Lord Bronn Stokeworth]

Unfortunately, most of what I have to say is spoilers (though careful watchers might have a big clue):

It's not justice. He wasn't killed for any crime he committed. He was killed so the Tyrells could get more power. Just because someone is awful person doesn't mean that they cannot be a victim. Nor does it their murderer "just." Joffery totally deserved to die. But it doesn't make his death "just" or the Tyrells (at least those who knew/took part in it) any better for it.

[P. frontalis chiripepe]

Unfortunately, most of what I have to say is spoilers (though careful watchers might have a big clue):

It's not justice. He wasn't killed for any crime he committed. He was killed so the Tyrells could get more power. Just because someone is awful person doesn't mean that they cannot be a victim. Nor does it their murderer "just." Joffery totally deserved to die. But it doesn't make his death "just" or the Tyrells (at least those who knew/took part in it) any better for it.

I agree. In this context, it isn't really so much about the act being 'just' as it is about the act being a good one. Just and Good overlap but not inclusively. If Joffrey was walking through the castle and a random stone fell from the ceiling and killed him it wouldn't be 'just', because you can't call a random accident 'justice'. But it still could be called 'good' depending on your viewpoint because it may prevent years and years of senseless violence and cruelty and murder. Similarly, what happened at the wedding wasn't necessarily a just act, but it was a good one.

[Florina Laufeyson]

You should be sad because Joffrey was murdered, which is the opposite of justice.

I should not be sad a tyrant and a psychotic little bleeder is dead. I am not Christian so im not going to do the "decent Christian thing" when vengeance should be wrought. What i am sad about? That the people who deserved their vengeance on Joffrey the most, werent the ones who destroyed him. There is little honor in Joff's death, but that doesnt mean its any less satisfying to people like Sansa who had lost so much due to this little bastard.

Vengeance is sweet.

Karma is often sweeter.

Deal with it. B) And do not tell me how i should feel about my fictional entertainment. Thats icky and intrusive.

Groan.

I only see this being a problem if he was murdered by someone who thought their actions counted as justice. Clearly that's not the case.

Preach!

[Asha Greyjoy:Feminist Icon]

If it were, then the Freys would not be expected to uphold it in the first place. Guest right is considered sacred throughout Westeros.

You are right about most of this, however, I disagree with many of your conclusions.

1) Are you talking about justice or about legality? Those two are not necessarily the same. What is legal may not necessarily be just. Was Ned Stark beheading the NW ranger who ran away because he was terrified after having seen the White Walkers murder his companions justice? Ned certainly thought it was, but did the man really deserve death? I don't think so.

Is deserting the NW really such a terrible crime that it merits death, as opposed to a lot of other crimes (including murder and rape) which aren't deemed as serious and can result in the perpetrator being forced to join the NW (an organization that some people join of their own free will)? I don't think so, either. Even Ned Stark didn't seem to think so. He didn't argue to Bran that the man deserved death, he argued that death penalty was necessary because a man who deserts the NW would be very dangerous, because he's in a desperate situation. But he's only in a desperate situation because a deserter gets a death penalty according to the law. What Ned did was enforce the law, not enforce justice.

Between that death, and Joffrey being murdered at his wedding, I'd argue that the latter is much closer to justice, because Joffrey deserved a death sentence much more than the NW ranger did. Even if the murderer was not motivated by the desire to bring him to justice, Joffrey was probably murdered because of the kind of person he is and the kind of things he does.

2) If a murder were the opposite of justice, are state executions the opposite of justice? Is state-sanctioned murder that much better than individual murder - say, a murder one done by someone who wishes to punish the guilty or remove a dangerous person from a position of power/capability to do further harm? (For instance, Arya killing Polliver.) The obvious answer is that it's better because it maintains law and order, while something like a vigilante or revenge kill does the opposite. But that, again, is a matter of law and order, not justice. The state/its regime and judiciary can also be corrupt, murderous and unjust, and even if it is not, there may be failure of justice - people who are executed or otherwise punished may actually be innocent, or the judge may be prejudiced and give them a much harsher sentence than they deserve.

(To use an ASOAIF/GoT example, the execution of Ned Stark was legal [inasmuch as one recognizes Joffrey as the king, but Joffrey himself had no idea he may not be legitimate], because Joffrey was the king and had the authority to order it. The executions of Ned's father and brother at the order of the Mad King Aerys were definitely legal, because he had the authority to order it under the laws of the Seven Kingdoms [and nobody even questioned his legitimacy as the hereditary monarch]. So, does that mean that those were examples of justice, while Joffrey's murder or the murder of the Mad King were examples of injustice?)

When it comes down to it, the motivations of Joffrey's murderer are likely to be very similar to the motivations of the state in executing criminals: either justice, or - more likely - the practical motive of removing of a dangerous person from the stage and making it impossible for them to do any further harm.

3) Good luck with getting legal justice in Westeros. It should be pretty clear at this point that it's extremely unlikely to happen to regarding most of the crimes committed by powerful people (which includes pretty much everything done by Tywin, Joffrey, Roose Bolton, Walder Frey etc.), or people who operate in the state of chaos (like the Mountain, Polliver, and other people committing horrible crimes in war-ravaged Riverlands). Most of the time, only way to have the perpetrators punished for what they've done and to make them incapable of doing any more harm is, well, to murder them illegally. Since the alternative is to let them get away with it and keep doing the same, I'll take the murder, gladly, and be happy about it.

4) The third reason that motivates the legal punishments, an attempt to show an example and deter further wrongdoings by other people who may follow the example, realizing that you can get away with it, also applies in this case, even though it may not have been the motivation of Joffrey's murderer. The deaths of Aerys II and Joffrey show that you can't get away with being a complete douche and committing crimes left and right just because you are a king, and that your absolute power is not enough to protect you. The fate of Aerys II was used by Tyrion as an example for Joffrey, and while it didn't help, the deaths of Aerys II and Joffrey can have the same effect.

5) Yes, guest right doesn't mean what it used to. But, in a way, that can be seen as an example of karmic justice and a warning: you shall reap what you sow. If you break the rules and commit a horrible crime, consequences will follow and others will use the same against you. That's maybe not entirely applicable here since Joffrey was not involved in the RW, but if we look at Joffrey's murder as a strike against the Lannisters, it shows that Tywin was dead wrong when he gave his (bullshit) justification of the RW and the reasons why it's supposedly good for the realm.

6) You are right that Joffrey's death does not change that much in terms of the Lannister power structure. I would much rather have Tywin Lannister murdered, if I had to choose, since he is actually crucial for the Lannister power structure (and is also responsible for many more crimes than Joffrey, but that's another matter).

You are also right that Joffrey's death results in a bad consequence of Tyrion, who's probably innocent, getting wrongfully arrested and possibly convicted/executed.

But on the other hand... if one is hoping that a power structure built on treachery and murder, such as the Lannister power, will collapse - and I certainly am - then something that severely destabilizes the Lannister power structure is a good thing, and there's no doubt that Joffrey's murder and the resulting tensions stemming from the lack of knowledge about the idendity of the murderer (including Tyrion's arrest) will do just that.

7) Becoming a homeless refugee fleeing for her life is a considerable improvement of circumstances for Sansa, compared to what she was before, i.e. a powerless captive forcibly married into the family who murdered most of her family. Sansa herself would most likely agree, since she's been dreaming of getting away from the Lannisters since her father's beheading (and, in the books, had actually been planning to do so, since she had offers, which the show had decided to deny her).

In short: there are actually quite a few reasons to feel happy because of Joffrey's murder (some of them purely practical), even though there are also other reasons to feel concerned about it.

My. God.

Where have you been all my life?

[Beric175]

It's an ugly situation overall.

Fact 1) Joffrey's a cowardly, petty tyrant who enjoys cruelty and always wants to get his way.

Fact 2) Joffrey's a scared boy dying in his mother's arms without understanding the why or what of what is happening to him at that moment.

Fact 3) Guest right applies to the host as well as the guests (see Craster).

So yeah, actually lots of reasons to be conflicted about this. Me being a strong believer in human dignity I cannot enjoy other people engaging in base instincts by celebrating the murder of a child. Your culture and your engagement with it indicates something about you as an individual and even if on the surface it feels satisfying, it should not be because Martin is trying to tell you that the best way to deal with tragedy is to take it and get over it (like Sansa does), yet most viewers have this thirst for revenge for past injuries inflicted on their favourite characters built up for 3 seasons now (the Arya-types). I don't think going mad with revenge like Arya does is the appropriate response to a hard life, if anything it shows her psychological weakness, as opposed to Sansa who has been dealt a rough enough hand as well (getting constantly abused, mocked and nearly getting raped) and yet she holds it together and keeps her humanity, as opposed to Arya who's so willing to throw it all away so easily.

I will end by saying that i'm not happy about Joffrey dying as a person because that tyrant was also still a vulnerable human being endowed with human dignity and so I will not be jumping up and down on his grave anytime soon. Nor will I pretend that it was a great loss for anyone other but Cersei to whom my sympathy went at the moment of Joffrey's death. Overall, it was an ugly individual dying in an ugly way, showing us all the ugliness beneath the surface of his demeanour before and as he was dying, leading to an even uglier situation going forward, whilst showing to us the ugly mentality of some of the viewers. Thus is the nature of the Purple Wedding.

[Tall Tyrion Lannister!]

Is there a source from the texts that implies that a guest harming his host carries the same taboo as a host harming his guest? It doesn't change my stance on this issue, but I was just wondering. I don't remember reading that anywhere.

Guest right goes both ways.

[TheWanderer]

Unfortunately, most of what I have to say is spoilers (though careful watchers might have a big clue):

It's not justice. He wasn't killed for any crime he committed. He was killed so the Tyrells could get more power. Just because someone is awful person doesn't mean that they cannot be a victim. Nor does it their murderer "just." Joffery totally deserved to die. But it doesn't make his death "just" or the Tyrells (at least those who knew/took part in it) any better for it.

I don't think that is the Tyrells motivation because it's not really true. 1) Margery is only Queen if Joffery is King OR if they can get her engaged to Tommen. While it is very likely that Margery would be engaged to Tommen following Joffery's death it is far from guaranteed, especially as Tywin no longer really needs their help and Cersei hates them. 2) Tywin is the real power behind Joffery's throne, this only becomes more true with Tommen king since Tommen is even younger.

They really seem to be more concerned with the danger Joffery poses to Margery than anything else (especially given the conversation they had with Sansa in the show).

Guest right goes both ways.

But does it actually apply here?

They're not in his home, they're not staying in his home, he hasn't given them bread and salt and wouldn't be expected to give them guest gifts when they leave. I don't think just having people to an event automatically qualifies them as your guest, I don't even think having people in your home automatically qualifies them as your guest (else Joffery broke it rather badly when he had that singers tongue removed). I honestly don't think Joffery's murder can be considered a violation of guest right, which is probably why no one (in universe) does.

[P. frontalis chiripepe]

Guest right goes both ways.

That may be, but I'm wondering where in the text it actually states this. I'm just interested to see it.

[Dudu42]

So, Joffrey is dead. Time to celebrate, right? No, you probably shouldn’t. And not for the reasons you think.

Sure, the Christian thing is to say every death is a tragedy and to murder even your enemies is to sin. But not everyone is Christian and even Christianity realizes to protect life sometimes one must take life.

The Christian thing would only make sense in a Christian environment. So, this point isn't so relevant.

You should be sad because Joffrey was murdered, which is the opposite of justice. And the lack of justice in Westeros is the real tragedy. Indeed, the immediate aftermath of his murder was an accusation and an arrest. If Tyrion is guilty, then he may be punished for killing Joffrey. If he is innocent, even worse the death of Joffrey is costing him his freedom and quite possibly his life.

The show almost began with an act of justice. Eddard’s men found a deserter of the Night’s Watch, which is a capital crime. Eddard questions the man and finds him guilty of desertion. In front of witnesses, he explains his authority, let the accused have his last words, and then swings the sword.

Currently, no one knows why Joffrey is dead. It is an act of violence at a time when violence and greed has become common. There was no recounting of his crimes, no one announcing his or her authority to carry out the sentence. Instead, we are going to see the apparatus of justice used to punish his presumed killer and legitimize his cruelty and reign.

This is a tragedy, yes. Innocent people will pay. I just wonder if Joffrey staying in the throne was a bigger tragedy. I think it probably is, but then again, conjectures...

Worse, the poisoner probably ate at the wedding feast. Meaning he or she was a guest. Why is this important? Because of the great social law which forbids guests and hosts from harming each other… the very same law Robb Stark depended upon for his safety at the Twins. Are we to cry for the treachery that killed Robb and yet cheer it for Joffrey?

And ultimately, nothing in Westeros has changed for the better. Joffrey’s younger brother and Cersei’s youngest child Tommen is going to quickly be crowned king. Tywin Lannister will continue to rule as Hand while the Boltons continue to rule in the North as a reward for betraying the Starks. The Greyjoys continue to hold the rest of the North and the Riverlands continue to be devastated by king’s men like Polliver. Bran, Rickon, and Arya remain as homeless refugees who are fleeing for their lives, and now because of Joffrey’s death it appears Sansa will be joining them.

While cheering a well-deserved death is cathartic for the mind, it isn’t for the people who still have to live in Westeros.

All the talk about justice and law seems to me a bit of secondary. What about freeing Westeros from a completely sociopath ruler? Isn't that a good reason to cheer?

And I see some posters arguing that cheering about the death of a child is simply wrong? But really, if you could describe Joffrey in a single word, would you choose "child"? Why not "jerk", "murderer" or the one I just used, "sociopath"?

The fact Westeros had such king in throne had to be adressed. If not by murdering him, then how? I think whoever had the balls to plan and execute Joffrey's assassination did a favor to Westeros. Of course this will lend to a lot of unfortunate outcomes, but someone had to kill that kid, he was a cancer.

Even if that somehow end up making Lannister's power stronger it was, in the end a good thing. And I honestly believe it'll actually make their power stronger. One of the reason the whole North entered in war was Ned's beheading, an order from Joffrey, not Tywin. Sure, that made Lannister presence weaker since they acquired so much more enemies, but it was overall harmful to Westeros, since it was plagued by a gruesome war.