Jump to content

Archived

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

Snormund

Can we talk about Jon?

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, snow is the man said:

the vale's biggest strength at this point is that they haven't really fought and lost alot. When they fought at the battle of the bastards they essentially came in at the end and ended it real quick and likely lost a hundred people at most. They are a wealthy region and more importantly they have alot of food there. The vale is famously fertile. So they have the supplies to help an army which at this point is just as important as the soldiers themselves. The  vale are also more used to the cold then everyone except the north and possibly the riverlands. So basically they could make a massive difference in alot of ways. Also aegon came and started with three dragons and a few hundred troops if I remember right and conquered everywhere but dorne. So dany conquering westeros with somewhere around fifty thousand dothraki (probably more) and six thousand unsullied (when she first gets there) and three dragons is plenty. Plus dorne had already bent the knee and promised soldiers and lets say a fraction of the grey isles joined her. Then you factor in who wouldn't fight. The riverlands will not fight for the lannisters and don't really have any forces to make a difference and the north would never join with the lannisters so she could leave the north out of it until later. The problem she had was that she put kid gloves on at the beggining rather then getting the lannisters to fight a big battle where she used her dragons like at the field of fire

Cersei at least was expecting the dragons and was prepared. If Dany were to lose her dragons due to anything, she would have no chance at conquering westeros. She does need some alliances, which is why she made an alliance with Yara and Dorne. Fighting the north and the vale had Jon not bent the knee would have been extremely ill advised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Armand Gargalen said:

Is he showing his stab wounds around? I do not think so, as he is even reluctant to tell the story.

Even if he told the story and showed the wounds, I am pretty sure many would question him leaving the Watch.

Even some people among the audience, me included, who are positively sure he died and was resurrected, consider him an oath breaker, who abandoned sacred vows because of their wording, completely disregarding their spirit.

And you are telling me than absolutely everyone, from Bronze John Royce to freaking paranoid queen Cersei Lannister, think he is a honorable man who can be 100% trusted? BS

Does does not stop the showrunners for not giving a damn, sadly

Jons oath was to the day of his death. He died. Plain and simple. I do agree he may have to explain it to others not on the wall, but his vows plainly say till his death. I thought his last judgement on ollie should not have been passed by him. his watch ended when he died. On top of it being his own brothers who killed him. Jon is definitly an Honorable man... The watch just couldn't get over its culture of aggression with the wildlings and it outdated ideals. They literally know the WW are coming, yet still focus on minor things. 

The only real vow he broke (In the Books) was Ygrett and at the very end when he decided to ride to winterfell. Everything else he did, was not. The problem with the NightsWatch is that thier watch and the wall was meant to defend against the others... Not the wildlings. Somehow the true reasoning for the wall and the watch got lost when the others got lost and I think Jon realized this. Which is why he ended up getting stabbed. 

"Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. 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. I am the fire that burns against the cold, the light that brings the dawn, the horn that wakes the sleepers, the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come.."
―The Night's Watch oath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ramla said:

Jons oath was to the day of his death. He died. Plain and simple. I do agree he may have to explain it to others not on the wall, but his vows plainly say till his death. I thought his last judgement on ollie should not have been passed by him. his watch ended when he died. On top of it being his own brothers who killed him. Jon is definitly an Honorable man... The watch just couldn't get over its culture of aggression with the wildlings and it outdated ideals. They literally know the WW are coming, yet still focus on minor things. 

The only real vow he broke (In the Books) was Ygrett and at the very end when he decided to ride to winterfell. Everything else he did, was not. The problem with the NightsWatch is that thier watch and the wall was meant to defend against the others... Not the wildlings. Somehow the true reasoning for the wall and the watch got lost when the others got lost and I think Jon realized this. Which is why he ended up getting stabbed. 

"Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. 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. I am the fire that burns against the cold, the light that brings the dawn, the horn that wakes the sleepers, the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come.."
―The Night's Watch oath

You can bold the wording as much as you like, it is still wording.

In a society where dying and being resurrected is not commonplace, until my death is a poetic way of saying FOR EVER, because dying and coming back from the dead are simply not expected to happen.

It is similar to the marriage vow: Till Death Do Us Part. If a person claimed that his marriage is not valid any more because he died and was resurrected, I am pretty sure most people will consider him a cheater and oath breaker. His spouse would, for sure.

As for his brothers killing him, it was just part, not all of them. He could have easily executed them for treason (what he did) and continue leading the ones who stayed loyal. 

I agree the Watch had forgotten its true purpose and Jon had the right of it about letting the wildlings go through the Wall. But Jon was the Lord Commander, once the mutineers had been done with, he was in a position to steer the Watch in the right direction. Instead, he abandoned it.

I strongly believe that the showrunners giving Jon a "free pass" out of the Watch was an awful decision, that really diluted his character. GRRM has created a universe where vows are more than important, they are an identity definer. As Jaime told Cat, these vows create conflict in the heart, which is one of, if not the, main themes in ASOIF.

By letting Jon out of his vows via the wording and without the shadow of a doubt form him is beyond deviating from the source material, is going  AGAINST what the source material tells us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Armand Gargalen said:

It is similar to the marriage vow: Till Death Do Us Part. If a person claimed that his marriage is not valid any more because he died and was resurrected, I am pretty sure most people will consider him a cheater and oath breaker. His spouse would, for sure.

Well, there are plenty of cases of people who were innocent of bigamy because they reasonably believed their spouse was dead even though they weren't

Then again, I'm not aware of any cases of people who were innocent of bigamy because they reasonably believed they themselves were dead. There is the legend of the guy who was sentenced to be hanged by the neck until dead, the rope broke, he was set free, and then he tried to claim he was no longer married. But that story ends with his wife killing him and being acquitted because if his argument stands she couldn't have murdered a dead person, and if it doesn't, she was justified and in fact doing the state of Texas a favor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just for the sake of comparison, let´s examine what the other character who had died and was resurrected did after his resurrection.

Lord Berric had been tasked by Ned Stark to kill or capture the Mountain in the name of the King. When he is killed, he does not say: "Hey chaps, I died so I guess this mission is finished for me. I am going back to my fancy home at the Stormlands and this guy here, Anguy, will be your new leader. Good luck". 

Instead, his resolve grows stronger, because he believes that he is been brought back to continue his mission. 

And before it is mentioned, I am aware than his orders did not include the until your death wording. It was still implied that he would follow them until he completed his task or died trying.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, falcotron said:

Well, there are plenty of cases of people who were innocent of bigamy because they reasonably believed their spouse was dead even though they weren't

Then again, I'm not aware of any cases of people who were innocent of bigamy because they reasonably believed they themselves were dead. There is the legend of the guy who was sentenced to be hanged by the neck until dead, the rope broke, he was set free, and then he tried to claim he was no longer married. But that story ends with his wife killing him and being acquitted because if his argument stands she couldn't have murdered a dead person, and if it doesn't, she was justified and in fact doing the state of Texas a favor.

So basically you are confirming that his whole society, up to the state, considered him a cheater for going against the spirit of a vow, twisting the wording to suit his own ends.

Shame Westerosi society (in the show) does not place that much importance on vows any more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎8‎/‎28‎/‎2017 at 8:18 PM, Snormund said:

I guess he did whoops. Still comes off as ungrateful to Mel if he's willing to forgive theon to a degree 

 

 

it also was really stupid to banish someone who can make sure he doesn't stay dead. 

I don't think he wants to come back again though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 29-8-2017 at 1:46 AM, Meera of Tarth said:

S7's theme_-----> boatsex. 

Scenes that support this theory:

Wighthunt for Cersei, it's Tyrion's idea. But once Jorah wants to go there, Jon quickly wants also. That's because he wants to be a brave guy.

Dany admits he is behaving like a brave man...

He destroys the purpose of the wight hunt because he feels the need to win Dany's heart as an honourable man, considering that in their last scene she didn't jump into his bed after being brave. So, by doing it, he takes a rik, but when they are in the corner, he nows that was the most quickly way leading to boatsex, which is what he has always wanted.

No matter who died in the wight hunt, what matters is the present, and boatsex.

O my dear, your posts are brilliant :P!

I agree completely of course

17 hours ago, Snormund said:

I know but it makes me so mad to see my favorite character and actress treated that way. I think they have wasted a really interesting and unique character and a very talented actress in Carice Van Houten. 

Carice van Houten, my poor Northern neighbour, one of the pride and glories of the Dutch acting world (she is really considered to be one of the best Dutch actresses of all time) 

(She lives in Amsterdam and she have birth last year to a son. So I actually think the filming of last season was during the last moments of her pregnancy and the first months of her son's live. I also think they only not have wasted her talent and the character Mel but also the fact Carice is very stunning in real live. In the show a lot of her beauty is taken away due the costume, make up, ... which is very sad considered she is supposed to be very beautiful. This is probably very shallow from me.)

--

I already have been pissed at Jon for usurping his little brother's place as the Lord of Winterfell/KitN or his sisters'. If he doesn't step aside when he hears about his real parentage, I really will get mad. It means the sisters' kid takes the place of the real children.

I also got pissed when I saw him bending the knee to Dany (I don't think Dany is a good moral person btw. I still get flashbacks of how she treated poor Hizzy).

Robb and those other Northerners died to be finally free from the Iron Throne. The Iron Throne or rather the Targs and the Lannisters are responsible a lot of injustice. 

The first time we learn of the North Remembers in the books is when Robb says they will lose the Karstarks even if Harrion would be happy to become Lord Karstark after his father's death. Harrion has no other choice than abandon the Starks or otherwise his own bannermen would leave him ("Robb shook his head. "Even if Harrion were that sort, he could never openly forgive his father's killer. His own men would turn on him. These are northmen, Uncle. The north remembers."

How in gods' name will they ever accept Jon bending the knee to a Targ, the family who killed his grandfather and his uncle whose hand is Lannister, the family who killed his father and plotted the death of their King, his mother and a lot of Northerners. And to make it even worse Tyrion was at that moment part of the regime/the Small Council. 

They might accept it if there are long term compensations like some guarantees (food from the crown during the winter, protection of their local customs, ...)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people are being a little hard on Jon for the whole leaving the night watch thing after the stabbing and ygrittes death would be too much for any man. Some people just hating on jon i think. I do think Jon is doomed because he will not rest until he dies and I think he will rule because people ask him and not because wants to lead. What depends on Jon is which has the best plot armor Dany or jon with the creators of the show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, EddardSnow said:

I think people are being a little hard on Jon for the whole leaving the night watch thing after the stabbing and ygrittes death would be too much for any man. Some people just hating on jon i think. I do think Jon is doomed because he will not rest until he dies and I think he will rule because people ask him and not because wants to lead. What depends on Jon is which has the best plot armor Dany or jon with the creators of the show.

I think you are misunderstanding this completely. Jon is a fictional character, so it is quite pointless to hate or defend him. What we can do, and some are trying to do here, are two things:

1. Analyzing the character actions. From this point of view, some people think what Jon did constitutes oath breaking.We are judging the action, not the character. And most importantly, we are trying to analyze what this action means for the character development, which leads us directly to point 2.

2. Analyzing how the character is portrayed by the authors. From this point of view, some people think the showrunners made really bad decisions that diluted a character that was fairly complex and conflicted in the books.

I will go with another yet example of how the showrunners are completely destroying any complexity the original character had.

Does nobody think it is a tad hypocritical of Jon to go all around Westeros asking people to put their wars in hold because of the Army of the Dead threat when last season he left the Watch and gathered an army to attack the Boltons to save his brother and take his family castle back? Why did not go on a wight hunt to prove the Boltons and the Northern Lords that the threat is real and asked for a truce until the Night King is defeated? He was as aware back then as he is now of the threat. Ramsey being a crazy sociopath is barely a excuse, because Cersei is not so much better than Ramsei was. 

Do not get me wrong, I do not have any problem with a character being hypocritical, if it makes for a good story. But it is quite puzzling how nobody in the whole show calls Jon out for this. Instead, everyone from humble Davos (who was "done with kings") to bitchy queen Cersei, keeps remarking how honest and brave and committed he is. Just because the showrunners do not want us to think of Jon as a grey character, but a proper hero we should always root for,

And that is bad storytelling and actually setting the fantasy genre back several decades.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jon kneeling bothered me, only because of the timing.

 

This is the guy who makes difficult decisions that earns him enemies for the greater good. Not kneeling while he was in Dragonstone, I felt was out of character. He does not care half as much about the title KITN than he care about getting people to fight against the army of the dead. If kneeling would have secured that from Dany then he should have done so, and it would have been for the greater good. The only plausible reason for Jon Snow not to do that, was that the Northern lords would disown him for it and bicker among themselves, which was the reason the show alluded to....

 

So then...

 

Instead, he knelt for.. ummm... something... he likes her?. The northern lords chose their KITN, they could have decided for themselves if they wanted to choose the Targ after the battle against the walkers if Jon was so confident they would see her in the same way. It's really weakened his character, made him look a bit silly. Even worse I feel the show is going to gloss over the betrayal from the KITN in favor of the more immediate threat from the walkers. 

I wasn't as bothered about his out from the Nights Watch as others here, imo him kneeling (for no reason) was a much more prominent slap in the face to his lords and his house. 

But on reading the title I thought we were here to talk about Jon Snows butt, we can all forgive Jon Snows butt. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

You can bold the wording as much as you like, it is still wording.

In a society where dying and being resurrected is not commonplace, until my death is a poetic way of saying FOR EVER, because dying and coming back from the dead are simply not expected to happen.

That's one side. On the other hand his brothers, who were bounded by oath to obey the chosen Lord Commander (Jon), betrayed him. And it is a little bit difficult to pledge your life and honor to a group of people, who want to kill you and who shit on their oaths and honor. But, okay, if that's not enough I will give you another reason:

Jon ignored parts of the oath when he went beyond the Wall with Qhorin and joined the Wildlings (he killed a brother/his commanding officer, took a wife). But he did it for the greater good, to protect the realm of men from the Wilding invasion.

Maybe Jon broke his oath to the Night's Watch when he left it, but you should acknowledge too, that he hasn't stopped protecting the realm of men from the White Walker threat. Let's be frank and open: After Jon's resurrection the Night's Watch was in a desperate situation. There were only a few hundred (at maximum) brothers left and a huge army of death marching to the Wall. Stannis was dead, the Warden of the North was a psycho who wanted Jon's head and who won't help them defending the wall. So Jon did the one thing, which would help them defeating the Night's Watch, he left the Wall, killed the Boltons, took Winterfell, became the ruling Lord/King of the North and then tried to organise the war against the White Walkers with the (small) army of the North. Yes, he broke parts of the oath, he took a crown and so on, but he did it to fulfil the most important part of the oath, he did it to protect the realm.

And he didn't stop there and then. After he became king and saw, that there were probably to few defenders with the wrong weaponry to fight against Wights and White Walkers, he went to Dragonstone, to get dragonglass and to get an aliance with Daenerys.

Of course there were rumours around the foreign invader called Daenerys with her army of gelded men and savages. So you can't blame Jon for his caution when Dany promised her help in exchange for his fealty. If he pledged fealty to Daenerys it would be possible that he loses the support of the Northern Lords. But who says that Dany would keep her word when the Northern Lords squabble among themselves (you have to remember, Dany only really believed in the White Walker threat when she saw the threat herself)?

This changed when Dany came on dragon back to rescue the wight-hunt-party. She lost a dragon for her help, she saw the threat herself, so that her promise to help became more significant, she proofed her character (she personelly came to rescue them). And I think Jon himself thinks that Daenerys is a able and good queen after that. And by pledging fealty he prevented future tension between the North + Vale and Daenerys, because after the defeat of the White Walkers she would have resumed in der attempt to get the dominion over whole Westeros (including the North and the Vale).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Armand Gargalen said:

Does nobody think it is a tad hypocritical of Jon to go all around Westeros asking people to put their wars in hold because of the Army of the Dead threat when last season he left the Watch and gathered an army to attack the Boltons to save his brother and take his family castle back? Why did not go on a wight hunt to prove the Boltons and the Northern Lords that the threat is real and asked for a truce until the Night King is defeated? He was as aware back then as he is now of the threat. Ramsey being a crazy sociopath is barely a excuse, because Cersei is not so much better than Ramsei was. 

I think a major point that needs to be mentioned here is the letter that Bran sent. Jon didn't know how immediate the problem was until he learned that they were close to Eastwatch. This made it immediate for him. He may have been lounging on Dragonstone for months mining Dragonglass and trying to convince Dany, but when he saw that letter he wanted to go back and fight with or without her support. I think it was the realization that he was now basically almost out of time that spurred the desperate actions of the last few episodes. The W threat changed the calculi of political reality completely. 

 

1 hour ago, Nezm said:

Jon kneeling bothered me, only because of the timing.

 

This is the guy who makes difficult decisions that earns him enemies for the greater good. Not kneeling while he was in Dragonstone, I felt was out of character. He does not care half as much about the title KITN than he care about getting people to fight against the army of the dead. If kneeling would have secured that from Dany then he should have done so, and it would have been for the greater good. The only plausible reason for Jon Snow not to do that, was that the Northern lords would disown him for it and bicker among themselves, which was the reason the show alluded to....

 

So then...

 

Instead, he knelt for.. ummm... something... he likes her?. The northern lords chose their KITN, they could have decided for themselves if they wanted to choose the Targ after the battle against the walkers if Jon was so confident they would see her in the same way. It's really weakened his character, made him look a bit silly. Even worse I feel the show is going to gloss over the betrayal from the KITN in favor of the more immediate threat from the walkers. 

Here It is the same thing. The threat is too close. There is not going to be much time for the Northern lords to bicker. He needs her fully on board and he needs it immediately. Dany was not really willing to commit in the way he needs before. She would have said yes to helping him, but prioritized the fight for the Iron Throne. She is still bothered by the fact that Cersei will march back into half the country if she leaves without securing her agreement, even after seeing what is coming. Dany is finding it very difficult to pause (perhaps even surrender) her lifelong goal of getting the Iron Throne despite the danger. I wouldn't find it surprising for her to still be thinking that she would help too only if Cersei agrees to help. At least now she's locked in to defend the North. And in the larger scheme, it seems Jon needs Daenerys on board more than Cersei.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Haskelltier said:

Of course there were rumours around the foreign invader called Daenerys with her army of gelded men and savages. So you can't blame Jon for his caution when Dany promised her help in exchange for his fealty. If he pledged fealty to Daenerys it would be possible that he loses the support of the Northern Lords. But who says that Dany would keep her word when the Northern Lords squabble among themselves (you have to remember, Dany only really believed in the White Walker threat when she saw the threat herself)?

This changed when Dany came on dragon back to rescue the wight-hunt-party. She lost a dragon for her help, she saw the threat herself, so that her promise to help became more significant, she proofed her character (she personelly came to rescue them). And I think Jon himself thinks that Daenerys is a able and good queen after that. And by pledging fealty he prevented future tension between the North + Vale and Daenerys, because after the defeat of the White Walkers she would have resumed in der attempt to get the dominion over whole Westeros (including the North and the Vale).

Lets also remember that the Northern lords are not exactly being very loyal back home. They are a cantankerous bunch. Jon's move doesn't only put the North behind her (after the WW threat is dealt with) but also Daenerys behind him. 

At this juncture the threat is so immediate that Dany will come in as a savior, not a conqueror.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Haskelltier said:

That's one side. On the other hand his brothers, who were bounded by oath to obey the chosen Lord Commander (Jon), betrayed him. And it is a little bit difficult to pledge your life and honor to a group of people, who want to kill you and who shit on their oaths and honor. But, okay, if that's not enough I will give you another reason:

Jon ignored parts of the oath when he went beyond the Wall with Qhorin and joined the Wildlings (he killed a brother/his commanding officer, took a wife). But he did it for the greater good, to protect the realm of men from the Wilding invasion.

Maybe Jon broke his oath to the Night's Watch when he left it, but you should acknowledge too, that he hasn't stopped protecting the realm of men from the White Walker threat. Let's be frank and open: After Jon's resurrection the Night's Watch was in a desperate situation. There were only a few hundred (at maximum) brothers left and a huge army of death marching to the Wall. Stannis was dead, the Warden of the North was a psycho who wanted Jon's head and who won't help them defending the wall. So Jon did the one thing, which would help them defeating the Night's Watch, he left the Wall, killed the Boltons, took Winterfell, became the ruling Lord/King of the North and then tried to organise the war against the White Walkers with the (small) army of the North. Yes, he broke parts of the oath, he took a crown and so on, but he did it to fulfil the most important part of the oath, he did it to protect the realm.

And he didn't stop there and then. After he became king and saw, that there were probably to few defenders with the wrong weaponry to fight against Wights and White Walkers, he went to Dragonstone, to get dragonglass and to get an aliance with Daenerys.

Of course there were rumours around the foreign invader called Daenerys with her army of gelded men and savages. So you can't blame Jon for his caution when Dany promised her help in exchange for his fealty. If he pledged fealty to Daenerys it would be possible that he loses the support of the Northern Lords. But who says that Dany would keep her word when the Northern Lords squabble among themselves (you have to remember, Dany only really believed in the White Walker threat when she saw the threat herself)?

This changed when Dany came on dragon back to rescue the wight-hunt-party. She lost a dragon for her help, she saw the threat herself, so that her promise to help became more significant, she proofed her character (she personelly came to rescue them). And I think Jon himself thinks that Daenerys is a able and good queen after that. And by pledging fealty he prevented future tension between the North + Vale and Daenerys, because after the defeat of the White Walkers she would have resumed in der attempt to get the dominion over whole Westeros (including the North and the Vale).

The fact some other members of the Watch misbehaved does not excuse him. There are still good, committed guys in the Watch, including Ed Tollett. It is even worse, he did not leave the Watch when he died. He had the cheek to appoint a successor AFTER HE HAD DIED, when he was not technically LC anymore.

Killing Quorin was not breaking the vows, he was following a direct command. Having sex was Ygritte was breaking the vows both in wording and spirit; it has been established, though, than having sex is rarely persecuted, because the command understand their men "have needs".  And despite this, he still had to pay for it, when his brothers call him put for being a oath breaker and a wildling sympathizer.

Jon was not aware the Warden of the North wanted his head when he left the Watch. What is actually another mistake form the showrunners. Jon receiving the Pink Letter after his death is one more attempt at whitewashing Jon´s desertion. In the books, he is not murdered for letting the wildlings through the Wall, but for deserting. His duty was not gather an army to attack Winterfell, that does not help to defeat the NK at all. 

If he was so sure Ramsei would never be convinced to help (and I can not still understand why he is worse than Cersei in this area), he could have done that "tour of the North" to recruit Northern Lords to fight with the Watch, not against Ramsei, who, according to his recently discovered mantra is on his side, "because he is breathing". 

18 minutes ago, Hajk1984 said:

I think a major point that needs to be mentioned here is the letter that Bran sent. Jon didn't know how immediate the problem was until he learned that they were close to Eastwatch. This made it immediate for him. He may have been lounging on Dragonstone for months mining Dragonglass and trying to convince Dany, but when he saw that letter he wanted to go back and fight with or without her support. I think it was the realization that he was now basically almost out of time that spurred the desperate actions of the last few episodes. The W threat changed the calculi of political reality completely. 

 

Here It is the same thing. The threat is too close. There is not going to be much time for the Northern lords to bicker. He needs her fully on board and he needs it immediately. Dany was not really willing to commit in the way he needs before. She would have said yes to helping him, but prioritized the fight for the Iron Throne. She is still bothered by the fact that Cersei will march back into half the country if she leaves without securing her agreement, even after seeing what is coming. Dany is finding it very difficult to pause (perhaps even surrender) her lifelong goal of getting the Iron Throne despite the danger. I wouldn't find it surprising for her to still be thinking that she would help too only if Cersei agrees to help. At least now she's locked in to defend the North. And in the larger scheme, it seems Jon needs Daenerys on board more than Cersei.

A possibility, but it is hardly a excuse for him starting a war to divide the North when he should have been trying to unify it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Jon and Dany Targaryen said:

She agreed to help him fight the white walkers before he gave such allegiance... so there was no need for support. But he couldn't help himself.. he loves her, recognizes she risked her life for them, and was overpowered by the force she brings with her dragons.. not to mention the conversations he's had where those around him think not bending the knee was all about pride.

I think this is the point where many are having a tough time. Firstly, does he love her? I think he quite clearly does. And she loves him back too. I don't think there is much to challenge here frankly. But the question that seems to be central here is: Did he hand over the North because he loves her?

I do not think that is true. He sincerely believes that the North would be better served by accepting her. Remember that Northern independence was never really something he cared much for. This is the same person who acknowledged Stannis as king despite the fact that Robb had declared independence and Stannis regarded Robb as a traitor.

There is another question of course, i.e. is Jon's objectivity about Dany heavily clouded by his feelings for her? I suspect the answer here has to be yes, it is. He might be seeing her as far better than she is because he loves her. This is only too human and I do not think he is above this. My major concern with the Jon/Dany romance is that Dany is actually falling for the man he actually is, but he's not really getting to see her worst side. This can cause problems eventually. Or it may turn Dany into a better person. She does have a vicious side that can do atrocious things (e.g. collective punishment, burning people etc.) which makes even her advisers uncomfortable. These have been hammered repeatedly this season. In comparison Jon is almost a saint in terms of what the audience sees of him. Maybe this love will make her a better person? He does seem to be bringing out a softer, better side of her than has ever been seen on this show. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Apoplexy said:

Cersei at least was expecting the dragons and was prepared. If Dany were to lose her dragons due to anything, she would have no chance at conquering westeros. She does need some alliances, which is why she made an alliance with Yara and Dorne. Fighting the north and the vale had Jon not bent the knee would have been extremely ill advised.

Cersei's preparation, as per Jaime, was not too effective. And now that Dany knows about it she'll avoid coming too far down. Remember that in the initial conquest, Aegon the conqueror actually lost a dragon to a similar device in Dorne.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Armand Gargalen said:

The fact some other members of the Watch misbehaved does not excuse him. There are still good, committed guys in the Watch, including Ed Tollett. It is even worse, he did not leave the Watch when he died. He had the cheek to appoint a successor AFTER HE HAD DIED, when he was not technically LC anymore.

Killing Quorin was not breaking the vows, he was following a direct command. Having sex was Ygritte was breaking the vows both in wording and spirit; it has been established, though, than having sex is rarely persecuted, because the command understand their men "have needs".  And despite this, he still had to pay for it, when his brothers call him put for being a oath breaker and a wildling sympathizer.

Jon was not aware the Warden of the North wanted his head when he left the Watch. What is actually another mistake form the showrunners. Jon receiving the Pink Letter after his death is one more attempt at whitewashing Jon´s desertion. In the books, he is not murdered for letting the wildlings through the Wall, but for deserting. His duty was not gather an army to attack Winterfell, that does not help to defeat the NK at all. 

If he was so sure Ramsei would never be convinced to help (and I can not still understand why he is worse than Cersei in this area), he could have done that "tour of the North" to recruit Northern Lords to fight with the Watch, not against Ramsei, who, according to his recently discovered mantra is on his side, "because he is breathing". 

A possibility, but it is hardly a excuse for him starting a war to divide the North when he should have been trying to unify it.

He was in a different state of mind then. Soon after returning from the dead, he was willing to go south and say "screw it" to everything (almost like "let someone else deal with this crap"). It was Sansa who pulled him back into caring about something when she showed up. She had to persuade him to care about doing these things. Most of season 6 was spent with him trying to find his place as a Stark after he felt betrayed by the NW. He didn't even want KiTN. Only after getting it does his mind seem to have returned to the major threat. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tijgy said:

O my dear, your posts are brilliant :P!

I agree completely of course

Carice van Houten, my poor Northern neighbour, one of the pride and glories of the Dutch acting world (she is really considered to be one of the best Dutch actresses of all time) 

(She lives in Amsterdam and she have birth last year to a son. So I actually think the filming of last season was during the last moments of her pregnancy and the first months of her son's live. I also think they only not have wasted her talent and the character Mel but also the fact Carice is very stunning in real live. In the show a lot of her beauty is taken away due the costume, make up, ... which is very sad considered she is supposed to be very beautiful. This is probably very shallow from me.)

--

I already have been pissed at Jon for usurping his little brother's place as the Lord of Winterfell/KitN or his sisters'. If he doesn't step aside when he hears about his real parentage, I really will get mad. It means the sisters' kid takes the place of the real children.

I also got pissed when I saw him bending the knee to Dany (I don't think Dany is a good moral person btw. I still get flashbacks of how she treated poor Hizzy).

Robb and those other Northerners died to be finally free from the Iron Throne. The Iron Throne or rather the Targs and the Lannisters are responsible a lot of injustice. 

The first time we learn of the North Remembers in the books is when Robb says they will lose the Karstarks even if Harrion would be happy to become Lord Karstark after his father's death. Harrion has no other choice than abandon the Starks or otherwise his own bannermen would leave him ("Robb shook his head. "Even if Harrion were that sort, he could never openly forgive his father's killer. His own men would turn on him. These are northmen, Uncle. The north remembers."

How in gods' name will they ever accept Jon bending the knee to a Targ, the family who killed his grandfather and his uncle whose hand is Lannister, the family who killed his father and plotted the death of their King, his mother and a lot of Northerners. And to make it even worse Tyrion was at that moment part of the regime/the Small Council. 

They might accept it if there are long term compensations like some guarantees (food from the crown during the winter, protection of their local customs, ...)

 

Idk I think Carice is sexy and seductive as hell as Melisandre on the show.  She definitely looks younger off the show at times though. Either way she's drop dead gorgeous. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Armand Gargalen said:

You can bold the wording as much as you like, it is still wording.

In a society where dying and being resurrected is not commonplace, until my death is a poetic way of saying FOR EVER, because dying and coming back from the dead are simply not expected to happen.

It is similar to the marriage vow: Till Death Do Us Part. If a person claimed that his marriage is not valid any more because he died and was resurrected, I am pretty sure most people will consider him a cheater and oath breaker. His spouse would, for sure.

As for his brothers killing him, it was just part, not all of them. He could have easily executed them for treason (what he did) and continue leading the ones who stayed loyal. 

I agree the Watch had forgotten its true purpose and Jon had the right of it about letting the wildlings go through the Wall. But Jon was the Lord Commander, once the mutineers had been done with, he was in a position to steer the Watch in the right direction. Instead, he abandoned it.

I strongly believe that the showrunners giving Jon a "free pass" out of the Watch was an awful decision, that really diluted his character. GRRM has created a universe where vows are more than important, they are an identity definer. As Jaime told Cat, these vows create conflict in the heart, which is one of, if not the, main themes in ASOIF.

By letting Jon out of his vows via the wording and without the shadow of a doubt form him is beyond deviating from the source material, is going  AGAINST what the source material tells us.

Im not sure about minimizing the importance of the words themselves. Can't preach about the oath, then say its just wording. But, I could be taking it too literal though... Especially with how i just said how stuck in in a particular culture the NW is. But, his brothers, no matter it being only some, broke their vows and killed their lord commander. Second time in the span of what a year? Lord Commander Mormont hadn't even got used to the Harps and violins and the watch was killing another brother and commander. Im sure in the books it will be quite different but i believe it will end in the same situation. I think if Jon died by some other means and was resurrected he probably wouldn't have left the watch on that technicality. I think in the show, it was glossed over and he just left with little said. Books will explain it better.

Even so, he should have had to do some explaining or had some writ from the NW to show he'd been released of his vows, signed by the Lord Commander.

And Forever is Forever... Ones life is not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×