Jump to content

Archived

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

jons squire

Why are Davos etc protecting Jons body?

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Sir Loin Steak said:

(i) I don't think that's a natural reaction. He's stone cold dead, respecting the body by lugging it up a flight of stairs to dump on a table seems like it should be a much lower priority than immediately alerting the rest of the Watch.

The rest of the watch who nailed up the traitor sign?

Davos isn't stupid. He took a long look at the scene and decided that standing around outside discussing what to do next would be a bad idea. He's quicker to the conclusion that they need loyal people than anyone else. But on a human level the thought of leaving Jon's body outside under a traitor sign for possible future desecration wouldn't be an option. It's not a massive undertaking you know, they weren't moving Wun Wun's corpse.

Quote

(ii) Are you suggesting that the show is using Lassie logic now?

Well played sir. Reductio ad absurdum no less. I am flattered. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Clash said:

The rest of the watch who nailed up the traitor sign?

Davos isn't stupid. He took a long look at the scene and decided that standing around outside discussing what to do next would be a bad idea. He's quicker to the conclusion that they need loyal people than anyone else. But on a human level the thought of leaving Jon's body outside under a traitor sign for possible future desecration wouldn't be an option. It's not a massive undertaking you know, they weren't moving Wun Wun's corpse.

If it was the entire rest of the Watch why weren't they just murdered in their sleep? Why would they immediately assume everyone else is against them? If the traitors had full confidence that they can get away with the murder, why did they all leave? If the overwhelming majority of the Watch was with them wouldn't they be more public? It's not a smart move on Davos' part, because he's cut the group off from any potential help from other Watch members (even among those who aren't Jon loyalists, you would assume there would be numerous members who would still be against a bloody coup).

Them immediately being worried about future desecration of the corpse seems like a stretch. Also if that is their concern, then you've just effectively admitted that they are "protecting" Jon's body.

 

The Lassie comment was because you wrote "the fact that everyone else who might have come already knew what Ghost was howling about?" (multi-quote not working properly for me). Which I took to mean that you were arguing that either everyone except the loyalists already somehow knew about the murder (which Thorne's later address to the Watch disproves), or that everyone somehow understood the meaning of Ghost's howling. Neither of which makes sense, and also seems like an irrational conclusion for Davos to jump to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Sir Loin Steak said:

If it was the entire rest of the Watch why weren't they just murdered in their sleep? Why would they immediately assume everyone else is against them? If the traitors had full confidence that they can get away with the murder, why did they all leave? If the overwhelming majority of the Watch was with them wouldn't they be more public? It's not a smart move on Davos' part, because he's cut the group off from any potential help from other Watch members (even among those who aren't Jon loyalists, you would assume there would be numerous members who would still be against a bloody coup).

So you're suggesting that they leave the body where it is and call for help. What happens then? They are surrounded by Thorne's men, separated from each other, taken to different parts of the castle and get no hearing from anyone. Who's going to object?

Quote

Them immediately being worried about future desecration of the corpse seems like a stretch. Also if that is their concern, then you've just effectively admitted that they are "protecting" Jon's body.

I used the word 'possible' for a reason.

Quote

The Lassie comment was because you wrote "the fact that everyone else who might have come already knew what Ghost was howling about?" (multi-quote not working properly for me). Which I took to mean that you were arguing that either everyone except the loyalists already somehow knew about the murder (which Thorne's later address to the Watch disproves), or that everyone somehow understood the meaning of Ghost's howling. Neither of which makes sense, and also seems like an irrational conclusion for Davos to jump to.

You used the phrase in an attempt to ridicule me and my argument. Please don't try and dress it up as something else now that you were called on it. I don't really care whether it was a factor or not. It's as valid as you suggesting that calling for help at the scene of a murder that had clearly been carried out by a large number of people is a sensible course of action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Clash said:

(i) So you're suggesting that they leave the body where it is and call for help. What happens then? They are surrounded by Thorne's men, separated from each other, taken to different parts of the castle and get no hearing from anyone. Who's going to object?

(ii) I used the word 'possible' for a reason.

(iii) You used the phrase in an attempt to ridicule me and my argument. Please don't try and dress it up as something else now that you were called on it. I don't really care whether it was a factor or not. It's as valid as you suggesting that calling for help at the scene of a murder that had clearly been carried out (iv) by a large number of people is a sensible course of action.

(i) I've already given reasons why assuming that everyone else is against them doesn't make sense, and puts them in very bad position tactically to boot.

(ii) So you've acknowledged that they are "possibly" protecting Jon's body. It seems possible you don't want to commit to any particular argument.

(iii) That part of your argument was ridiculous, I felt the Lassie comparison was apt. I explained the reference because you didn't seem to understand what I was saying, not as an attempt to dress it up, I stand by it.

(iv) The characters don't know or have any reason to assume it was a large number of people (I also provided reasons why it was reasonable to assume the opposite). They didn't observe the murder, they only found a body. You are injecting information they don't have.

Look if you enjoyed the scenes and they made sense to you, great, I'm happy for you. I felt they were very contrived, and that it is entirely reasonable for people to question the logic of them. That you keep inventing your own reasons for why things happened the way they did, would seem to me to be further evidence that additional reasoning/information was needed within the episode to justify the characters actions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Sir Loin Steak said:

(i) I've already given reasons why assuming that everyone else is against them doesn't make sense, and puts them in very bad position tactically to boot.

You gave one reason, that they could be murdered in their sleep. That's a hell of a lot of complicity to spread around. Whatever about motivating people to kill Jon (and Thorne made a reasonable fist of justifying themselves), escalating that to picking out some 'known' friends of Jon and fellow comrades in arms of the would be murderers and murdering them in their sleep would be five stops north of ridiculous.

Quote

(ii) So you've acknowledged that they are "possibly" protecting Jon's body. It seems possible you don't want to commit to any particular argument.

You ask for reasons and I give you some possibilities and then you accuse me of inconsistency? Nice one.

Quote

 

(iii) That part of your argument was ridiculous, I felt the Lassie comparison was apt. I explained the reference because you didn't seem to understand what I was saying, not as an attempt to dress it up, I stand by it.

 

I've already commented on this. If you continue to feel the need to justify yourself go right ahead.

Quote

(iv) The characters don't know or have any reason to assume it was a large number of people (I also provided reasons why it was reasonable to assume the opposite). They didn't observe the murder, they only found a body. You are injecting information they don't have.

Footprints. Masses of footprints under Jon's body and around the scene. People thought Davos was looking at the shape in the blood :)

Quote

Look if you enjoyed the scenes and they made sense to you, great, I'm happy for you. I felt they were very contrived, and that it is entirely reasonable for people to question the logic of them. That you keep inventing your own reasons for why things happened the way they did, would seem to me to be further evidence that additional reasoning/information was needed within the episode to justify the characters actions. 

And now we've moved on to patronising. You've got the full deck of cards out now.

Do I need to remind you where this started? That people were saying that Davos and co. were protecting Jon's body. I pointed out that nobody had said that in the scene. No mention was made of protection or even of his body once iot was removed. You then proceeded to try and pick that apart and kept producing more and more absurd courses of action for them. Every time I point this out to you and give reasons, you then start on those reasons. rinse and repeat. Oh, except now you're trying to demonstrate the absurdity of my responses to your absurdity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Clash said:

And now we've moved on to patronising. You've got the full deck of cards out now.

Do I need to remind you where this started? That people were saying that Davos and co. were protecting Jon's body. I pointed out that nobody had said that in the scene. No mention was made of protection or even of his body once iot was removed. You then proceeded to try and pick that apart and kept producing more and more absurd courses of action for them. Every time I point this out to you and give reasons, you then start on those reasons. rinse and repeat. Oh, except now you're trying to demonstrate the absurdity of my responses to your absurdity.

Yes, you have become increasingly patronising.

You argued that because no character said that they were protecting Jon, that the audience shouldn't interpret their actions as such. You then argued that what was happening made sense based on other things that the characters didn't articulate and that weren't shown to the viewer (and in my opinion the reasons you gave didn't hold up to scrutiny). You even subsequently argued that one of the reasons for moving the body would be to protect it. You are contradicting yourself, you are invalidating your own argument. Not only that, you seem to want to dictate that everyone should share your particular interpretation of the scenes, and that to so much as question it is absurd.

I see no point in further attempts to discuss this with you. I don't think you've thought through your own arguments, much less what I've been writing and you seem very eager to take offence, while at the same time launching into ad hominem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Sir Loin Steak said:

Yes, you have become increasingly patronising.

You argued that because no character said that they were protecting Jon, that the audience shouldn't interpret their actions as such. You then argued that what was happening made sense based on other things that the characters didn't articulate and that weren't shown to the viewer (and in my opinion the reasons you gave didn't hold up to scrutiny). You even subsequently argued that one of the reasons for moving the body would be to protect it. You are contradicting yourself, you are invalidating your own argument. Not only that, you seem to want to dictate that everyone should share your particular interpretation of the scenes, and that to so much as question it is absurd.

I see no point in further attempts to discuss this with you. I don't think you've thought through your own arguments, much less what I've been writing and you seem very eager to take offence, while at the same time launching into ad hominem.

 

Ah come on! I had first dibs on 'patronising'. You can't just march up and take it on a whim. There's copyright :D

I'm not the only one that says the actions that Davos took seem natural and normal. You've been trying, ever more desparately to come up with alternative scenarios, ones that require even greater leaps of credibility than just the natural and normal reactions of Davos.Coupled with the fact that he has taken note of the many footprints under and around Jon's body made him fear for their safety and speaks against the notion of calling for help.

To paraphrase another poster; if you had to pick a scene to castigate for plot holes, this one would be at the bottom of the list. Every time I answer one of your supposed holes in my argument, you ignore it and move on to something else.

A bit rich of you to accuse me of ad hominem. You've used every possible way to diminish me and my argument. I called you on it and you tried to justify it whilst still doing it. I even tried to lighten the tone, but you were having none of it. If you feel that there's nothing more to discuss, that's fine. Everything that needed to be said has already been said at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would any of them want to think hes alive when coming back to life at that location usually doesnt bode well. its nothing more than tv cliche so the plot can happen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think they are protecting his body persay....Davos and company saw the body bleeding out and what are you gonna do? Just leave it there? They brought it inside and put him up on a table to inspect the body and then they happened to have to barricade themselves in said room to hide from the rest of the Thorne controlled Night's Watch and Jon's body just happened to be there....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My two cents:

Davos and the men are protecting themselves. The body is just something to fight for for morale or whatever. With Jon dead, Davos is in a precarious position. Thorne could take him prisoner and send him off to the Bolton's as gift (for their help against the Wildlings), which Thorne knows he's going to need in the fight with the White Walkers. Davos was safe only as long as Jon was there. Lastly, Thorne is probably, or already has, killed off any Jon supporters not in that room.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

because plot. plain and simple if anything, to rally against thorne, it would be easier and smarter to mix with the rest of the watch or get the hell out of castle black, not locking your self on some room.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Sir Loin Steak said:

That's a really bad example, Fredo literally states aloud that he does that for luck. It's possible to read into the scene other underlying motivations, but the audience isn't asked to come up with their own reasons for what the character is doing.

What Fredo says: it's for luck. What's implied: dude let me pray for my catholic soul before shooting me.

What Davos says: we don't need to die if we get help. What's implied: with the wildlings on our side we can turn the table.

In both cases some folks will ask absurd questions because they don't pay attention.

 

You simply don't like the choice that Davos & co made (staying and fighting the mutineers) same as me who hate that Robb chose to break the arrangement with the Freys. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess Davos regrets not getting the hell out of Castle Black as soon as he learnt about Jon's assassination... maybe he didn't want to go away without learning about the fate of Shireen? Even if news of Stannis's defeat and death have reachend them, the Night Watch probably doesn't know about Shireen's and her mother's deaths...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the posters who said that they are not defending the body, but instead hiding. They were viewed as supporters and friends on Jon who would probably take revenge. Quite honestly, I would also kill them if I was in Alister's shoes. With them dead, no one will trouble you. It it ruthless? Yes but he just killed his lord commander

its also possible that Alister really does not want them dead, after all, he has not done anything to Meli. With that said, it's clear Davos does not trust Alister.

 

Again, if you believe the theory on Jon, you know why directors had to take the body. The reasoning for the characters? Why not! That was their friends body, would you take it? Or would you rather let them carve it up like Robb's 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 27/04/2016 at 0:08 PM, ~DarkHorse~ said:

So, it looks like we are getting the ToJ in episode 3. I think Jon will also be resurrected in episode 3 as it will coincide with his identity reveal. It will also be 3 episodes after he was killed, which matches the biblical story of Christ. They already had him die under a cross, after all.

Looks like D&D aren't that level of geniuses after all.

Or any level of geniuses, for that matter :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×