[Spoilers] Night's watch plot doesn't make sense

[unitron]

What part of don't talk about the show in the book threads do people not understand?

[Tatsuwa]

Jons' assassination was a  coup d'état  plain and simple.  The events that prompted it were set in motion by the Targaryens long before. The Watch was a rather large standing army which, as has been noted, did not answer to the crown directly.  At that it was considered an honorable post, the advent of the Kingsguard and gold cloaks changed that. Knights aspired to fame and glory in the service of the crown and the wall became more or less a penal colony. The wildlings presented a clear and present danger to the North not the South. Recruiting eventually dwindled to forced service at the wall and any knights or lords going to the wall went as punishment. That situation sets up precedent for the mind set at the wall. An army needs an enemy to justify it's existence and since there were no White walkers or wights in any great number,if at all, the wildlings won the distinction of being public enemy #1.  Now the Others are coming back, which the South refers to, and has for a very long time, snarks and grumpkins.  As few as the watch are,most are now recruits and don't know the score. They think the wildlings are the only enemy north of the wall. 

[Slaysman]

On 5/21/2016 at 0:11 PM, Gala said:

Well, actually, that's exactly why they killed him... The letter and marching to Winterfell - was  a "last drop", and an occasion/opportunity...because I really do not think they were acting on the spur of the moment... so to speak. It was definitely a plan or a plot and they were discussing this act. 

And if I am not mistaken, Ramsey Bolton openly THREATENED the Lord Commander of the Watch. "The NIghts Watch takes no part in the wars of the realm" goes both ways, if I am not mistaken. The realm does not command the Watch. I bet Joer Mormont won't obey the kings command if he thought it was agains the Watch. After all, the Night's Watch/brothers has/have a special status. This was actually said few times in the books.

I seem to recall from the books that Stannis was cool with it as long as the wildlings/free folk kept the king's peace.

As for Jon marching on Winterfell...well he cannot fight a war on two fronts especially when the southern front is wide open for invasion from a sadistic douche. That and while it is not specifically stated threatening the Night's Watch and their Lord Commander is almost worse than violating guest right in the north. So in this case there really is no right or wrong side, just different perspectives.

As for the 100 men sent to the Wall to kill Jon, Cersei was imprisoned by the Faith before the plan could come to fruition.

[SmilingEye]

On 6/7/2016 at 6:38 AM, Ser Gareth said:

What doesn't make sense was their timing.  Out in the open, in front of everyone like that.  I do think there is a possibility that Bowen Marsh et al were given a choice.  Kill Jon Snow or else.  Otherwise the whole plot is ridiculous as they'd kill him in a far more subtle way.

I always presumed that Bowen Marsh and Co. seized on an opportunity created by Wun wun killing Ser Patrek of King's Mountain (likely in his attempt to 'steal' Val from the tower) and the general chaos that ensued.  

Two things of note, tho:  The first man to attack isn't the 'main' baddy (book Bowen or show Alliser), but a "gangling Steward" Wick Whittlestick.  Had this been an organized assassination attempt, you'd think they'd have planned it quite differently.

Second, that Bowen Marsh is crying when he stabs Jon.  Is this indicative of being under duress?  It's possible, though it seems unlikely.  Why would Bowen be crying?  Many (myself included) believe is there only to satisfy the 'salt and smoke' aspect of TPTWP's [re]birth, but there's at least potentially more to it..

[Tini]

On ‎02‎.‎11‎.‎2016 at 5:57 AM, SmilingEye said:

I always presumed that Bowen Marsh and Co. seized on an opportunity created by Wun wun killing Ser Patrek of King's Mountain (likely in his attempt to 'steal' Val from the tower) and the general chaos that ensued.  

Two things of note, tho:  The first man to attack isn't the 'main' baddy (book Bowen or show Alliser), but a "gangling Steward" Wick Whittlestick.  Had this been an organized assassination attempt, you'd think they'd have planned it quite differently.

Second, that Bowen Marsh is crying when he stabs Jon.  Is this indicative of being under duress?  It's possible, though it seems unlikely.  Why would Bowen be crying?  Many (myself included) believe is there only to satisfy the 'salt and smoke' aspect of TPTWP's [re]birth, but there's at least potentially more to it..

I think they would've set it up exactly like that. It's a question of shared responsibility. None of them wants to own up to a murder. They want many people to stab the Lord Commander. That way they can claim it wasn't their knife who killed him, not their decision to kill him: it was the NW's joint decision. Or NW justice. The more stabbers, the more diluted the guilt. And if the stabbers need a scapegoat, the first one to stab will most likely win that questionable honor.  I suspect we'll learn that this sort of passing judgment & punishment has a long tradition in the NW.

They would've attacked Jon that night even if Wun wun and Ser Patrek had not provided the opportunity. If not then, and there, they would've attacked Jon in his bed. It was their last chance to do so. The next day, Jon would've started moving - and not all of the conspirators would've gone with him.

I think Bowen Marsh was crying because he was feeling sorry for himself. He had probably hoped for a less public opportunity to kill Jon Snow.

[Amris]

If I put myself in Bowen Marsh's shoes the assassination attempt makes sense to me.

Bowen and Company represent the status quo. Jon is a revolutionary leader in the sense that he does things no one in his position has done before. Political leaders have been murdered RL for this very reason.

While we as readers know that bringing the wildlings south is essential for keeping them from turning into wights and for increasing the manpower on the wall - from Bowen Marsh's point of view the case is much less clear:

Bowen himself has not witnessed the Others' attacks on the fist and the raising of wights. Also the Battle of Hardhome has not happened in the books. So while there are witness reports on Others raising wights the case is much less clear cut than in the film series.

Contrasting this the evidence for the wildling threat is much stronger as the wildlings have always raided the north and been the adversary the Night's Watch has really been facing and fighting for a long, long time. Add to that that Mance has united the wildlings to attack the wall which makes the wildling threat seem more imminent than ever while the Others may have been sighted (reportedly from Bown's point of view) but not at all in the kind of numbers the wildlings had in their attack on the wall nor have the Other's in any way directly attacking the wall. So as to who currently is the bigger threat (as opposed to might be's in the future) I don't find it far-fetched to think of the wildlings first and foremost and think like 'lets get this threat dealt with first and then think of the possible Other threat later').

Moreover gambling on the wildlings actually helping the Night's Watch is a big risk!

Once the wildlings are through the wall they have the numbers and manpower to be a real threat to the Night's Watch. The Watch was overstrained containing them even with the wall between them. So if you are an old school hardliner and see the wildlings through the very real lense of several decades of continouus war experience against them I don't find it unreasonable to question the assumption of those enemies suddenly being friends and loyal to you and allow them to metaphorically put a dagger against your throat. It seems pretty natural to assume those enemies may put one over you on first opportunity and return to their old ways - only now you don't have a wall between you and them anymore and can do nothing to stop them.

And how are you supposed to fight the alleged Other threat if you are being engaged (and probably defeated by) the wildlings which you allowed into bed with you?

On top of that Lord Commander Snow not only took this big gamble, breaking with thousands of years of tradition and delivering the Watch to their traditional enemies' mercy: Now he is proposing to break the Night's Watch oaths (again!) by meddling in the political affairs of the Seven Kingdoms. Proposing to directly attack the Warden of the North and Lord of Winterfell! That's not only contrary to the Watch's oaths: That completely and utterly contrary to them.

To make this worse it very much looks like he's doing this for personal (family) reasons.

And even if Marsh & Co. thought Ramsay's letter would indicate Ramsay poses a threat to the wall - then the letter also makes it clear, the problem can be solved by complying with Ramsay's demands (which the current Lord Commander is clearly not even contemplating). By removing Jon the Night's Watch solves this dilemma.

As fans we sympathize with Jon and give him excuses and reasons why we think his decisions may be valid despite their - irregularity.

And yes, I sympathize with Jon too. But when looked at objectively his decisions concerning the wildlings have been highly risky (yes they might pay off - but still) and his behaviour towards Stannis (supporting him with provisiongs, advice etc) and the Karstark heir (helping her against her family) have been violations of the Night's Watch's neutrality already. He has more and more been behaving like a Lord in his own right (or a King in the North) and less and less like the neutral leader of the Night's Watch.

Now a Jon-led attack on Winterfell really would be the crossing of the Rubicon.

Caesar won. But he did rebel. No one can fault Pompejus for trying to defend the Republic against him. And arguably Brutus & Co. did rid the Republic of a self-appointed tyrant who had torn down the traditional order for personal gain.

Granted: Caesar did not have an 'Other' threat as an excuse for his putsch - but really, from Bowen' point of view: Where are the Others? Far away north of the wall and in small numbers. All he sees around him are wildlings.

And if logic fails to compel there still is racism as a motive.

I don't think it is far-fetched to assume Bowen and (probably a big part of the Night's Watch) has racist thoughts about the the wildlings. And don't tell me no one thinking that way would ever be tempted to rid themselves of their 'traitorous' Lord Commander who is in bed with these primitives.

Such behavior is not logical. But honestly - a hell of a lot of decisions in life are not logical. They are based on gut feelings and only rationalized afterwards.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Tini]

@Amris I agree that Jon's decisions and the Wildlings pushed Bowen Marsh and his companions over the edge. Their presence is just more proof that the Night's Watch is changing. And they don't like the changes that are taking place - that are taking place so rapidly that they scarcely recognize the Watch anymore.

The Night's Watch has been shrinking for centuries, and most of it's members are criminals now. Only very few men join the Watch voluntarily. Knights and nobles usually end up as leaders of the Night's Watch even though they are sent to the Wall in punishment, and often incompetent. Jeor Mormont was an exception because he joined voluntarily. Jon Snow is an exception for the same reason. And he received preferential treatment because he was Eddard Stark's son, even though a bastard.    

Bowen Marsh didn't like this. He liked it even less when the bastard beat him and succeeded Jeor Mormont as Lord Commander. He certainly wasn't the only one. Jon was young, inexperienced, a bastard, not a noble/knight. And he didn't respect their habitual rights. He expected them to work - he expected them to teach the simple folk, even Wildlings, that joined the Night's Watch how to fight. Jon promoted people based on abilities, without paying attention to birth, rank, or connections. Bowen Marsh and the old guard were losing influence.

Add to that the Wildlings - who, just like Jon, didn't fit into established Westerosi patterns. Refused to fit into these patterns. And while they respect Jon Snow, they don't respect the officers of the Night's Watch just because they are officers of the Night's Watch. If they start taking over some duties of the Night's Watch that the Night's Watch can no longer carry out, that means that irrelevance for Bowen Marsh is so much closer.   

 

[Whitering]

On 3/25/2016 at 8:50 AM, Criston of House Shapper said:

Well, your arguments make a lot of sense. They're pretty much what Jon keeps telling people like Bowen Marsh all the time. The problem is, that the Night's Watch, as well as the rest of the Seven Kingdoms, does not behave rationally. If you look at real-world-examples, like the fight against Climate Change, where there are people who still feel like it's not a big deal despite the overwhelming evidence. Or the european immigration crisis, where instead of working together, every country just feels like they have to make sure that all the refugees go to the other countries. People don't make rational choices all the time, so it does make sense that someone as clueless as Bowen Marsh would disaprove of the wildlings helping them, especially after fighting them at the Bridge of Skulls. The rest of the assassins are just following his lead. He of course makes a terrible decision, but he doesn't realize that, because he doesn't think rationally and is incompetent.

You can't compare it to the migrant crisis, which only adds to the world's population totals (they will be replaced in the countries they came from within a generation), while nobody is repopulating the North, which has room for probably 60 times the number of Wildlings out there anyway.

Nevertheless, you are correct, people have a very hard time changing course, only exceptional ones can do it, and we don't know how most of the rank and file feel about the whole thing, but the leaders are men who have spent decades fighting the Wildlings, hearing about their depredations and being blamed for letting horrible things happen. Hating the wildlings is in their blood, justifiably, they just haven't been able to put that aside. Jon has had an experience that no other Night's Watch man save for Mance Rayder have had, so we can't even really blame them too much.

Having said that, I think their days are numbered one way or the other (pun heh).

Also, Global warming is a different matter, the people on top never like change, whereas nobody will benefit from the invasion of the Others. Well, in a few years the water will have risen 2 inches and Bangladesh, Hollland and other places will be underwater, just like in the next book (hopefully), the Others will be past the Wall and nobody will be able to ignore the truth any longer.

[Voice]

On March 24, 2016 at 2:59 PM, rs1n said:

They know that the others are coming. They also know that they are outnumbered. Despite knowing that they cannot handle the others by themselves, they (some) refuse to consider an alliance with the wildlings. For some reason, this just makes no sense to me. I tried to consider the fact that some of the men (perhaps more recently, most of them) are cowardly and/or have a borne hatred toward the wildlings. But what does all that matter if they face getting wiped out by the others? To get to the point, why yet another mutiny (this time against Jon) when it's pretty obvious that they possibly still have no chance even with the help of wildlings?

 

Yup. I think there are many in the NW who simply do not believe that the tales are true, in spite of Othor, Jafer, and the massacre at the Fist. 

They had grown old on the Wall fighting wildlings, and it was from those battles that they drew what scant pieces of pride they had. Jon erased that pride, appointed wildlings to positions of import, allowed women to "man" a castle on the Wall, and even allowed a beastly Giant to reside at Castle Black. After committing such atrocities, Jon announced that he would be abandoning his post in order to meddle in southron affairs by leading an attack on the Boltons of Winterfell. 

Were the assassins narrow-minded? Sure. 

Were they short-sighted? Definitely.

But nonetheless, from their perspectives, those knives were justifiably driven into Jon's body "for the Watch."

[Whitering]

On 4/3/2016 at 2:47 PM, Ser Yorick Ampersand said:

Makes has much sense has Stannis and Renly fighting each other instead of uniting against Joffrey. Or Lisa not backing her sister in the war. 

The Nights Watch and the Wildlings are natural enemies. Its only natural both sides dont want join forces and find it hard to live together. Different cultures dont mix well together look at the Northeners vs Kinglanders not much love there either.

To be fair, Lysa and her guy who was controlling her got what they wanted by and large, a brutal war that left her husband to be in charge, that neither her or Cat survived is probably incidental to the plan as a whole.

[Bironic]

On 13.12.2016 at 7:11 PM, Voice said:

 

Yup. I think there are many in the NW who simply do not believe that the tales are true, in spite of Othor, Jafer, and the massacre at the Fist. 

They had grown old on the Wall fighting wildlings, and it was from those battles that they drew what scant pieces of pride they had. Jon erased that pride, appointed wildlings to positions of import, allowed women to "man" a castle on the Wall, and even allowed a beastly Giant to reside at Castle Black. After committing such atrocities, Jon announced that he would be abandoning his post in order to meddle in southron affairs by leading an attack on the Boltons of Winterfell. 

Were the assassins narrow-minded? Sure. 

Were they short-sighted? Definitely.

But nonetheless, from their perspectives, those knives were justifiably driven into Jon's body "for the Watch."

Couldn't have said it better.

Also IIRC, no one in the NW has seen an Other and lived to tell the tale. Some have seen wights, but almost all of them have fought wildlings, giants etc. So they hate the wildlings more than the hate the Others, because it's hard to hate something nobody has seen for thousands of years.

[Lord Fauntleroy]

 Racism,  nationalism and prejudice don't make sense and cause us to be self destructive. I think that's the gist of the Watch mutiny. 

[Neds Secret]

On 30/07/2016 at 5:40 AM, Tatsuwa said:

Jons' assassination was a  coup d'état  plain and simple.  The events that prompted it were set in motion by the Targaryens long before. The Watch was a rather large standing army which, as has been noted, did not answer to the crown directly.  At that it was considered an honorable post, the advent of the Kingsguard and gold cloaks changed that. Knights aspired to fame and glory in the service of the crown and the wall became more or less a penal colony. The wildlings presented a clear and present danger to the North not the South. Recruiting eventually dwindled to forced service at the wall and any knights or lords going to the wall went as punishment. That situation sets up precedent for the mind set at the wall. An army needs an enemy to justify it's existence and since there were no White walkers or wights in any great number,if at all, the wildlings won the distinction of being public enemy #1.  Now the Others are coming back, which the South refers to, and has for a very long time, snarks and grumpkins.  As few as the watch are,most are now recruits and don't know the score. They think the wildlings are the only enemy north of the wall. 

That was actually a real good Summation of the recent history of the watch!