assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 wow! so the only illogical hate is Stark hate (which barely even exists) you're not biased at all are you? NOT AT ALL... That's not what he said. Not all illogical hate is Stark hate, but these days a lot of the Stark hate is illogical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryanfury Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 I love the "barely even exists" part the most Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INCBlackbird Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 it's not because you think it's illogical that it IS illogical. I don't agree that Jon is evil but than again this is the first time I've ever heard that. all the other "stark hate" you mentioned I've never seen. it's mostly just people saying that the Starks aren't perfect... which is true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadlines? What Deadlines? Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 Jon Snow invented "Stark hate". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Lannister Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 Jon Snow invented "Stark hate". I hear he started all those Cat bashing threads too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryanfury Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 it's not because you think it's illogical that it IS illogical. I don't agree that Jon is evil but than again this is the first time I've ever heard that. all the other "stark hate" you mentioned I've never seen. it's mostly just people saying that the Starks aren't perfect... which is true.If you're happy with your own arguments being logical, why are you getting offended at the idea that other posts aren't logical in their arguments? It really has nothing to do with you in this case. :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julia H. Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 No, definitely not evil. I'd like to address the "Jon fantasizes about killing Slynt" issue. If he does, I'm not surprised, given the history between them. He also realizes that he finds it hard to think of Janos Slynt as a brother. No one can help their feelings and thoughts, especially when the relationship between two people is so loaded with emotionally intense (and in this case totally negative) memories. However, a man - and especially a Lord Commander - should be the master of his own actions. In addition to the above thoughts, Jon (in the same scene) also thinks this: I am giving you a chance, my lord. These are not his words, but another thought on the Slynt-problem, and I think we have reason to believe that he is just as sincere to himself here as when he thinks of Slynt's head. Have you ever been in a similar situation in real life? I have. (No, I didn't behead anyone.) Jon is doing what I'd do in his place. He knows he has reason to hate Slynt. He knows he cannot regard him (at the moment at least) as a brother. But he still wants to be fair. He does not want his personal emotions to interfere with his treatment of the man. That is the reason why he is giving Slynt a chance that he cannot give to every single black brother - a chance to command, a chance to start anew (away from Castle Black), a chance to have relative agency and authority. If Jon wanted to provoke Slynt, he would send him to muck out the stables, but he doesn't. According to Jon's own POV assessment, he is giving Slynt a chance. Slynt is an experienced soldier, but I think Jon is also trying hard to be fair, trying hard to solve the situation, and it plays a huge part in this decision. That is why he gives Slynt several chances, but in the end, Slynt gives him no choice. Regarding disagreement versus insubordination: There is someone who actually disagrees with Jon's decision of giving Slynt command of Greyguard. It is Giant, and he expresses his disagreement in the following manner: "Might be that's so," said Giant, "but I'd still send him to the kitchens to help Three-Finger Hobb cut up the turnips." That's disagreement, expressed respectfully and politely. Giant does not get executed. Slynt with his military career obviously knows what insubordination means. I doubt he tolerated this sort of behaviour among the gold cloaks. I also suspect that Cotter Pyke or Mallister in a similar situation would have Slynt hanged much sooner. You know, if similar insubordination came from a green boy who has been a pampered little prince at home so far and is now fresh on the Wall, or from a newly arrived vagabond teenager who has no idea of what a military organization is, perhaps Jon could afford to choose a lighter punishment to teach the boy a lesson without executing him. But Slynt knows full well what he is doing. He knows he is purposefully undermining the Lord Commander's authority, sowing the seeds of chaos in an already dangerous situation.This is inexcusable and there is only one way Jon can assert his authority here, and it is his duty to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonCon's Red Beard Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 Jon Snow bought another Lotso. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadlines? What Deadlines? Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 Jon Snow is evil. Ghost is the diet Coke of evil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robinvanpersie Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 The long answer is that the difference between Slynt and every other act of disobedience is that Slynt made a play at Jon’s position as LC. Jon is is a precarious position as it is (his most reliable supporters are either dead (the one-armed guy), have been sent away (Sam, Aemon) or not respected enough to make a difference (Satin and all the kids from his group). In a short time, Slynt was able to make a big enough power base to have a shot at over-throwing Jon. He’s shown that it is possible. If he isn’t dealt with severely, he will try again. And even if Slynt becomes completely loyal, the fact that he’s been forgiven will encourage another rebel the next time Jon makes questionable decisions. The short answer is that Jon didn’t have the energy to watch out for Slynt. He’s trying to negotiate Stannis’ presence on the Wall, the integration of the wildlings into the Gift, finding money for the NW to survive the winter, find the men to defend against the Others, and MOST importantly, remain the leader at the Wall, even when the vast majority of the troops at the Wall will either be Stannis’ or wildlings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INCBlackbird Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 If you're happy with your own arguments being logical, why are you getting offended at the idea that other posts aren't logical in their arguments? It really has nothing to do with you in this case. :/ I'm not getting offended perse I just think it's one of the most untrue things I've ever read. there is a serious stark bias in this fandom (I think mostly because they were the first characters we got POV's from so people create a bias from the start and than they're too stubborn to change it/refuse to put themselves in other people's shoes) really the starks barely get any hate and if they get "hate" it's usually a response to the extreme stark love and those of us who are sick of said bias. I personally get a bad taste in my mouth when I think of the starks even though I actually like most of them and I don't hate on them, it's fandom influence and all the ridiculous things i've read claiming for them to be saints and being unable to do anything wrong. if they would have been that perfect they'd have been bland, unrealistic characters! but thankfully they aren't, they're all pretty realistic. you know which characters do get a lot of hate due to this stark bias: Theon, Jaime, Sansa (yes, you heard me! she may be a Stark but she "betrayed" her family, it's absolutly ridiculous), Catelyn (see Sansa), the Freys (I'm not a fan of them but the idea that they should ALL be exterminated no matter who was and wasn't involved in the red wedding is ridiculous),... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Duncan The Average Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 Little known fact: The one who filled Pandora's box of all evils of the world was Jon Snow. Then he fucking opened it and used what he found inside to create AIDS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordStoneheart Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 I'm not getting offended perse I just think it's one of the most untrue things I've ever read. there is a serious stark bias in this fandom (I think mostly because they were the first characters we got POV's from so people create a bias from the start and than they're too stubborn to change it/refuse to put themselves in other people's shoes) really the starks barely get any hate and if they get "hate" it's usually a response to the extreme stark love and those of us who are sick of said bias. I personally get a bad taste in my mouth when I think of the starks even though I actually like most of them and I don't hate on them, it's fandom influence and all the ridiculous things i've read claiming for them to be saints and being unable to do anything wrong. if they would have been that perfect they'd have been bland, unrealistic characters! but thankfully they aren't, they're all pretty realistic. you know which characters do get a lot of hate due to this stark bias: Theon, Jaime, Sansa (yes, you heard me! she may be a Stark but she "betrayed" her family, it's absolutly ridiculous), Catelyn (see Sansa), the Freys (I'm not a fan of them but the idea that they should ALL be exterminated no matter who was and wasn't involved in the red wedding is ridiculous),... If the topic is now logical/illogical hate, where do you think this part falls into? Reactionary hate; the inability to ignore other people's preferences to the point of hating them out of spite. If that's truly where most of the Stark hate comes from, no wonder its derided as illogical. I also have never seen the word "perfect" associated with Starks unless it's coming from the haters, so there's that too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INCBlackbird Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 If the topic is now logical/illogical hate, where do you think this part falls into? Reactionary hate; the inability to ignore other people's preferences to the point of hating them out of spite. If that's truly where most of the Stark hate comes from, no wonder its derided as illogical. I also have never seen the word "perfect" associated with Starks unless it's coming from the haters, so there's that too. but most of the time it's not even hate. that's why hate is in between quotation marks there. most of the time it's just people going "look, the starks aren't perfect" and giving some mild criticism and than people go "OMG stark hate!" and than conversations get out of hand and both party's say things a little more extreme than what they really mean. it's not stark hate as much as it is people believing that sometimes the starks should be cricicized for what they have done as well. the only starks I have seen that get actual hate are Sansa and Catelyn and most of the time it's because "Sansa betrayed her family, how dare she" and Catelyn "is the cause of the red wedding, how dare she" so both of those are also due to Stark bias. it's possible that you've never seen the word "perfect" coming from a Stark fan but that's mostly because they won't say that directly but they'll imply it through the things they're saying about them. and than they'll get the response of "the starks aren't perfect" edit: even with this thread... evil is obviously a much too strong word but when I read what they were actually saying I don't think they really mean it that strongly. when I read the part where Jon killed Janos Slynt I kinda felt sick, mostly because he was begging and that makes a huge difference to me. I have a problem with executions especially when someone's begging for their lives. so I can understand why people found this event horrible, despite it being Janos. however I still understood why Jon did it and I don't blame him for it. he's still in my top 5 favourite characters and I think he's one of the nicest characters in these books. but that doesn't mean he can't be criticized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon in the North Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 edit: even with this thread... evil is obviously a much too strong word but when I read what they were actually saying I don't think they really mean it that strongly. when I read the part where Jon killed Janos Slynt I kinda felt sick, mostly because he was begging and that makes a huge difference to me. I have a problem with executions especially when someone's begging for their lives. so I can understand why people found this event horrible, despite it being Janos. however I still understood why Jon did it and I don't blame him for it. he's still in my top 5 favourite characters and I think he's one of the nicest characters in these books. but that doesn't mean he can't be criticized. I actually agree with this. When Slynt started begging for his life, I felt sorry for him for a moment. That said, Jon didn't execute him out of revenge, like some posters believe, but for insubordination, as was his right. Out of all the mistakes Jon made as Lord Commander, this was not one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordStoneheart Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 but most of the time it's not even hate. that's why hate is in between quotation marks there. most of the time it's just people going "look, the starks aren't perfect" and giving some mild criticism and than people go "OMG stark hate!" and than conversations get out of hand and both party's say things a little more extreme than what they really mean. it's not stark hate as much as it is people believing that sometimes the starks should be cricicized for what they have done as well. the only starks I have seen that get actual hate are Sansa and Catelyn and most of the time it's because "Sansa betrayed her family, how dare she" and Catelyn "is the cause of the red wedding, how dare she" so both of those are also due to Stark bias. it's possible that you've never seen the word "perfect" coming from a Stark fan but that's mostly because they won't say that directly but they'll imply it through the things they're saying about them. and than they'll get the response of "the starks aren't perfect" "Mild critcism" is putting it mildy when people try to equate the Starks with the actions of the Lannisters and Greyjoys in the present series. That truly is bias, trying to paint them all as the same. (All I can think of when people say that is this). The reason I haven't seen "perfect" from a Stark fan is more likely because fans really don't advocate "can do no wrong" in the way that haters do. It's the most basic strawman around here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the trees have eyes Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 Surely the text quoted by Deadlines? What Deadlines? in post #50 will knock this one on the head. Janos is so far over the line here that it's beyond belief. Nothing to do with Stark love / bias either so let's not get side-tracked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INCBlackbird Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 "Mild critcism" is putting it mildy when people try to equate the Starks with the actions of the Lannisters and Greyjoys in the present series. That truly is bias, trying to paint them all as the same. (All I can think of when people say that is this). The reason I haven't seen "perfect" from a Stark fan is more likely because fans really don't advocate "can do no wrong" in the way that haters do. It's the most basic strawman around here. well when you look at it altogether they are the same. it's not because someone is a lannister that they are automatically better than someone who is a stark because of their last name! that makes no sense that's just a gross prejudice! the only thing you can do is look at people individually and say that this person is better than this person because of this and that and that .but even than I don't think it's a good idea to compare character x with character y (except when pointing out a double standard of which there are a lot in this fandom as well. also usually because of said last name) there's also the point where I can like Tywin as a character and talk about his good and his bad sides (of which there are more bad sides) and dislike Ned and talk about his good and bad sides. and I can like Tywin more than Ned and still think Ned is a better person. I mean... two of my favourite characters are Cersei and Ramsay! and you'll never hear me say they're good people in any way! (because obviously they're not, although I know there are Cersei fans who disagree with that) BUT if I want to talk about Ramsay what do I get thrown at me? "he's one dimensional?" "what are you talking about he's still a bad person." and than I'm like "a character can be multidimensional AND a bad person..." when I talk about how I dislike Ned I get "HOW CAN YOU DISLIKE NED? he's so nice and he means so well" and sure that may be true but what? I can't criticize him for certain things in his personalty that I really really can't stand or I'm a hater? I'm sorry but when I like/dislike a character it's about said character's personality not about what they did/did not do. the starks aren't better than the lannisters or greyjoys every individual character is simply different! I like some of the starks, some of the lannister and some of the greyjoys... I won't give them any special treatment because they come from a certain house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadlines? What Deadlines? Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 well when you look at it altogether they are the same. it's not because someone is a lannister that they are automatically better than someone who is a stark because of their last name! that makes no sense that's just a gross prejudice! the only thing you can do is look at people individually and say that this person is better than this person because of this and that and that .but even than I don't think it's a good idea to compare character x with character y (except when pointing out a double standard of which there are a lot in this fandom as well. also usually because of said last name) there's also the point where I can like Tywin as a character and talk about his good and his bad sides (of which there are more bad sides) and dislike Ned and talk about his good and bad sides. and I can like Tywin more than Ned and still think Ned is a better person. I mean... two of my favourite characters are Cersei and Ramsay! and you'll never hear me say they're good people in any way! (because obviously they're not, although I know there are Cersei fans who disagree with that) BUT if I want to talk about Ramsay what do I get thrown at me? "he's one dimensional?" "what are you talking about he's still a bad person." and than I'm like "a character can be multidimensional AND a bad person..." when I talk about how I dislike Ned I get "HOW CAN YOU DISLIKE NED? he's so nice and he means so well" and sure that may be true but what? I can't criticize him for certain things in his personalty that I really really can't stand or I'm a hater? I'm sorry but when I like/dislike a character it's about said character's personality not about what they did/did not do. the starks aren't better than the lannisters or greyjoys every individual character is simply different! I like some of the starks, some of the lannister and some of the greyjoys... I won't give them any special treatment because they come from a certain house. This thread got all "meta" all of a sudden. It is perfectly acceptable to evaluate the actions of a particular house (read: geo-political entity) as distinct from the particular members of that house. I like Ned Stark but at the same time, i realize that his determination to not be more ruthless probably got tens of thousands of people killed and destroyed his house. That tension between, say, Neds idealism and Tywins Pragmatism is one of the great things about the series. Getting bogged down in "Stark hate" or "Lannister bias" is missing the forest for the trees. Also, Jon Snow invented "Lannister bias". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maid So Fair Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 Also, Jon Snow invented "Lannister bias". What a bastard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.