Jump to content
House Rootbreaker

The Great Debate: Should Jon Have Lied?

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, btfu806 said:

I mean, Jon Snow has lied in the show before, several times. Even broke his vows and did somethings that were not "honorable"

I don't know why all of a sudden it has all changed. Everything for seven seasons was revolved around the WW apocalypse. Now it's all about some girl he met a few episodes ago and has been able to hang out with for a few weeks. Makes sense..

Any half decent Westerosi Barrister would get him off the hook for any breaking of the Night's Watch vows based on this language:

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.

He clearly died, in effect ending his watch and rendering moot any vows made after said watch was ended. He did fuck Ygritte while the vows held, but he didn't take her as is wife or father any children.

What other vows did he break?

Edited by Ser Hyle

Share this post


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

Any half decent Westerosi Barrister would get him off the hook for any breaking of the Night's Watch vows based on this language:

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.

He clearly died, in effect ending his watch. He also did fuck Ygritte, but he didn't take her as is wife or father any children.

What other vows did he break?

Some are show some are book (I just know the books better)
Ygritte, they take an oath of celibacy, fathering no children pretty much means having sex, they make references to it in the show and book.
Letting wildings through the wall
Sending a team to hardhome to gather the wildlings that fled to Mother Mole
Letting Stannis stay at the wall and giving commanding advice. This is kinda huge because the NW can't interfere with any political affairs at all.
Arranging a political marriage between Alys and Sigornn (I know that's book but still).
Bargaining with Tormund in general.
Actually most of what he did as Lord Commander was against his vows and treasonous.

While he does these things because he believes the end justifies the means. Alright, I can live with that. Then he now wont? It's a complete shift in character.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, btfu806 said:

Some are show some are book (I just know the books better)
Ygritte, they take an oath of celibacy, fathering no children pretty much means having sex, they make references to it in the show and book.
Letting wildings through the wall
Sending a team to hardhome to gather the wildlings that fled to Mother Mole
Letting Stannis stay at the wall and giving commanding advice. This is kinda huge because the NW can't interfere with any political affairs at all.
Arranging a political marriage between Alys and Sigornn (I know that's book but still).
Bargaining with Tormund in general.
Actually most of what he did as Lord Commander was against his vows and treasonous.

While he does these things because he believes the end justifies the means. Alright, I can live with that. Then he now wont? It's a complete shift in character.
 

He also was given an order by Halfhand to gain the trust of the Wildlings.  So anything he did North of the Wall was him following orders. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Samwell in season 4 says the following:
"The interesting thing is, our vows never specifically forbids intimate relations with women. I shall take no wife, yes that's in there, no denying that. I shall father no children, it's very specific. But what our vows says about other...activities... is open to interpretation."
So Jon technically get's a pass for shagging with Ygritte. He never wed her, and he never had any children with her.

As for everything regarding the wildlings, the vow never states that they must be killed or prevented from passing the wall no matter what. The vow is to be "the shield that guards the realm of men" - and as Jon points out, the wildlings belong in the realm of men.

As for Jon giving Stannis advice, I'm rather certain that Jon pointed out over and over that the NW are supposed to stay neutral, and they where. It's not like he could've prevented Stannis from staying at Castle Black anyway.

So show-Jon, never actually breaks his vow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, btfu806 said:

Some are show some are book (I just know the books better)
Ygritte, they take an oath of celibacy, fathering no children pretty much means having sex, they make references to it in the show and book.
Letting wildings through the wall
Sending a team to hardhome to gather the wildlings that fled to Mother Mole
Letting Stannis stay at the wall and giving commanding advice. This is kinda huge because the NW can't interfere with any political affairs at all.
Arranging a political marriage between Alys and Sigornn (I know that's book but still).
Bargaining with Tormund in general.
Actually most of what he did as Lord Commander was against his vows and treasonous.

While he does these things because he believes the end justifies the means. Alright, I can live with that. Then he now wont? It's a complete shift in character.
 

Sure, they make references to it. But we haven't seen how that language stands up in court - there is a clear and substantial difference between having sex and fathering a child. Say for example I decided to provide some mouth love to a fiery haired wilding lass in a romantic cave setting. Most would classify that as a type of sex, but I think we can all agree it's impossible to father a child that way.

Where in the vows do they promise not to work with wildlings or let wildlings south of the wall? It seems to me the Night's Watch and the vows associated was a product of The Long Night, but since there was no sign of WW's and Wights for thousands of years, it became associated with protecting the 'North' from the 'Wildlings' instead. Now that the magical evil beings determined to destroy all life on the planet are back at it, the oath once again has nothing to do with Wildlings. Furthermore, Wildlings are clearly men and Nights Watchmen are under oath to "shield the realms of men," and therefore not helping the Wildlings escape the WW's would be oath-breaking, not the opposite.

I also fail to see any oaths preventing a Night's Watchmen from getting involved in politics or letting a self proclaimed King reside at Castle Black. This is convention, not oath. As long as he doesn't assume any political titles ('wear no crown') he should be fine.

Edited by Ser Hyle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Ser Hyle said:

Sure, they make references to it. But we haven't seen how that language stands up in court - there is a clear and substantial difference between having sex and fathering a child. Say for example I decided to provide some mouth love to a fiery haired wilding lass in a romantic cave setting. Most would classify that as a type of sex, and I think we can all agree it's impossible to father a child that way.

Where in the vows do they promise not to let work with wildlings or let wildlings south of the wall? It seems to me the Night's Watch and the vows associated was a product of The Long Night, but since there was no sign of WW's and Wights for thousands of years, it became associated with protecting the 'North' from the 'Wildlings' instead. Now that the magical evil beings determined to destroy all life on the planet are back at it, the oath once again has nothing to do with Wildlings.

I also fail to see any oaths preventing a Night's Watchmen from getting involved in politics or letting a self proclaimed King reside at Castle Black. This is convention, not oath.

I mean, we could go back and forth on this, but just read the books.... I don't have time to answer all your questions on the basics of the Night's Watch and how they operate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, SerJeremiahLouistark said:

He also was given an order by Halfhand to gain the trust of the Wildlings.  So anything he did North of the Wall was him following orders. 

This is very true. I personally don't think falling in love with a Wildling would count, but that's just my interpretation and it could be wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, btfu806 said:

I mean, we could go back and forth on this, but just read the books.... I don't have time to answer all your questions on the basics of the Night's Watch and how they operate.

Sorry but that's not how this works. This isn't directed only at you though.
This is subforum for the TV-show, and not the books.
Any arguments made from happenings and events in the books are redundant if they don't happen on the show.
Show-Jon can't be blamed for things that he hasn't actually done in the show, just because book-Jon did it.

If the nightswatch has other vows or rules in the books than they do in the show, then show-jon can't be blamed for breaking those rules. He can only be blamed for breaking the rules and vows set up in the show, and he never really does.

Edited by MinscS2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MinscS2 said:

Sorry but that's not this works. This isn't directed only at you though.
This is subforum for the TV-show, and not the books.
Any arguments made from happenings and events in the books are redundant if they don't happen on the show.
Show-Jon can't be blamed for things that he hasn't actually done in the show, just because book-Jon did it.

I give examples of what he does in the show as well. So go back and watch the show? Is that better for you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, btfu806 said:

I give examples of what he does in the show as well. So go back and watch the show? Is that better for you?

I'm actually watching season 4 while typing this, and I pointed out how the flaws in your argument. You didn't reply though.

Edit:

Samwell in season 4 says the following:


"The interesting thing is, our vows never specifically forbids intimate relations with women. I shall take no wife, yes that's in there, no denying that. I shall father no children, it's very specific. But what our vows says about other...activities... is open to interpretation."
So Jon technically get's a pass for shagging with Ygritte. He never wed her, and he never had any children with her.

As for everything regarding the wildlings, the vow never states that they must be killed or prevented from passing the wall no matter what. The vow is to be "the shield that guards the realm of men" - and as Jon points out, the wildlings belong in the realm of men.

As for Jon giving Stannis advice, I'm rather certain that Jon pointed out over and over that the NW are supposed to stay neutral, and they where. It's not like he could've prevented Stannis from staying at Castle Black anyway.

So show-Jon, never actually breaks his vow.

Edited by MinscS2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MinscS2 said:

I'm actually watching season 4 while typing this, and I pointed out how the flaws in your argument. You didn't reply though.

You edited your post so no I didn't answer. The fact you have to qualify your answer with "never really does" shows that he does. But regardless,there were rules set by other lord commanders that he continuously broke in the show, that's fine, that's a big part of his character and how he learns and matures. Are we really arguing that Jon was perfect and never broke any rules ever?

4 minutes ago, MinscS2 said:

Sorry but that's not this works. This isn't directed only at you though.
This is subforum for the TV-show, and not the books.
Any arguments made from happenings and events in the books are redundant if they don't happen on the show.
Show-Jon can't be blamed for things that he hasn't actually done in the show, just because book-Jon did it.

If the nightswatch has other vows or rules in the books than they do in the show, then show-jon can't be blamed for breaking those rules. He can only be blamed for breaking the rules and vows set up in the show, and he never really does.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, btfu806 said:

You edited your post so no I didn't answer.

No I haven't. :rolleyes:
Feel free to scroll up and see that it's unedited.

Are we really arguing that Jon was perfect and never broke any rules ever?

No, we're not.
You're pointing out things that haven't actually happened however, and 40 min ago you made a post where you stated that Jon has a complete shift in character. It's that statement that confuses me, because it's simply not true.

 

Edited by MinscS2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, MinscS2 said:

"The interesting thing is, our vows never specifically forbids intimate relations with women. I shall take no wife, yes that's in there, no denying that. I shall father no children, it's very specific. But what our vows says about other...activities... is open to interpretation."
So Jon technically get's a pass for shagging with Ygritte. He never wed her, and he never had any children with her.

You're basing this off Sam's interpretation who wants to just have an argument to have sex.... OK. They even reference in the show early on that if they hung everybody for oath-brekaing who went to Molestown, there would be nobody left to man the wall. It's brought up between characters several times that they can't have sex....But they do anyway. Just because "everybody does it" doesn't mean it's not oath breaking.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think he has broken any vows.  He has skirted on the edge and may have done things that other people interpret those vows as, but any good lawyer would get him off because none of those vows are specific enough for anyone to point at them being broken beyond a shadow of a doubt.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, btfu806 said:

You're basing this off Sam's interpretation who wants to just have an argument to have sex.... OK. They even reference in the show early on that if they hung everybody for oath-brekaing who went to Molestown, there would be nobody left to man the wall. It's brought up between characters several times that they can't have sex....But they do anyway. Just because "everybody does it" doesn't mean it's not oath breaking.

 

The vow is clear though, it doesn't explicitly forbid intimate relations, just weddings and the fathering of children. This has been pointed out both by Sam in the show, and several other forum users in this thread.

Just because the rest of the Nightswatch has interpreted it the wrong way for X amount of years doesn't mean that they still interpreted it the wrong way to begin with. You can drive on the wrong side of the road all your life, but it still doesn't prevent it from being the wrong side. The NW leadership was in a position to prevent watchers from having intimate relations, so they did - still doesn't mean that they were right in doing so, according to their own vow.

His relation with Ygritte aside, in what other ways did Jon break his vows?
You brought up some examples in one of your earlier posts, but they where either all book-related (so irrelevant) or simply not really examples om him breaking his vow. (Like letting the wildlings come south of the wall.)
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, MinscS2 said:

The vow is clear though, it doesn't explicitly forbid intimate relations, just weddings and the fathering of children. This has been pointed out both by Sam in the show, and several other forum users in this thread.

Just because the rest of the Nightswatch has interpreted it the wrong way for X amount of years doesn't mean that they still interpreted it the wrong way to begin with. You can drive on the wrong side of the road all your life, but it still doesn't prevent it from being the wrong side. The NW leadership was in a position to prevent watchers from having intimate relations, so they did - still doesn't mean that they were right in doing so, according to their own vow.

His relation with Ygritte aside, in what other ways did Jon break his vows?
You brought up some examples in one of your earlier posts, but they where either all book-related (so irrelevant) or simply not really examples om him breaking his vow. (Like letting the wildlings come south of the wall.)
 

So Sam didn't interpret it wrong? Just everyone else. OK.
My original post did mention that he broke his vows (sorry but the Ygritte thing is breaking a vow, hence why it was such a huge deal), you don't believe he did, that's fine. He also tried to forget his vows and run away to help out his family. Grant it, he didn't actually do it because he was forcefully stopped by his friends but I guess whether intent matters is a whole other discussion I don't feel like having. 

We can keep doing this with other matters, going back and forth but there is no point. You will say one thing, I another. 
What you said you had an issue with was that I said he had a shift of character. That his entire focus had been on WW and doing whatever he could to fight them, even lie. That is the shift of character I am talking about. I believe it was completely out of place for Jon to not do what's best for fighting the WW. I assume you will disagree. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't really matter if Jon lied or not, either way Cersei was going to do the same thing.  The scene was just a way to get as many actors screen time as possible without effecting the plot in any way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ser Hyle said:

Any half decent Westerosi Barrister would get him off the hook for any breaking of the Night's Watch vows based on this language:

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.

He clearly died, in effect ending his watch and rendering moot any vows made after said watch was ended. He did fuck Ygritte while the vows held, but he didn't take her as is wife or father any children.

What other vows did he break?

Good luck to any Barrister trying to prove he *actually* died and came back though - especially the way it happened in the show.

Also, it's kind of negated in the oath itself - all the nights to come is exactly that. If you die but it so turns out there are still nights to come then maybe your watch isn't exactly ended? Sure, it's a technicality, but so is the premise that if you 'die' your oath doesn't count.

Besides, if you get off on a technicality, that doesn't exactly make your a paragon of virtue. People shouldn't be going on about how you're the precious cinnamon roll and your word is gold of that is the case.

Edited by Maid So Fair

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Tadco26 said:

It doesn't really matter if Jon lied or not, either way Cersei was going to do the same thing.  The scene was just a way to get as many actors screen time as possible without effecting the plot in any way.

Don't you mean effecting the plot completely?  This scene had a HUGE impact on the rest of the episode and the final season, both directly and indirectly.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Maid So Fair said:

Good luck to any Barrister trying to prove he *actually* died and came back though - especially the way it happened in the show.

Also, it's kind of negated in the oath itself - all the nights to come is exactly that. If you did but it so turns out there's still nights to come then maybe your watch isn't exactly ended? Sure, it's a technicality, but so is the premise that if you did your oath doesn't count.

Besides, if you get off on a technicality, that doesn't exactly make your a paragon of virtue. People shouldn't be going on about how you're the precious cinnamon roll and your word is gold of that is the case.

:thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×