Jump to content

The execution of Janos Slynt was spot on


kissdbyfire

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Buell 2K said:

Janos Slynt resisted at first and then agreed.  He agreed to do what he was told.  Then Jon killed him anyway.  

notice why he agreed?  Because Jon threatened to kill him.  Then we see Jon literally think about it and go "well he's already disobeyed me this many times, I could put him in an ice cell but he'll go right back to plotting."  Jon is perfectly within his rights to do that, and I'd argue he'd be a saint if he didn't decide to kill Janos there.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Buell 2K said:

Janos Slynt resisted at first and then agreed.

No, he resisted, insulted Jon in private and stormed out of the room. Then, when given a second chance, he resisted, insulted Jon in public and tried to undermine him. He only agreed when he had a sword above his neck. Jon, quite rightfully in my opinion, understood that Slynt was not genuine in this about-face, and that a subordinate who only follows orders under the direct threat of death is no use, especially in the current situation. We have Jon's own thoughts on this, quoted several times in these threads... that Slynt would not relent, would never treat Jon with anything other than the deep personal hatred Slynt seems unable to relinquish, and that he would go back to whatever mutinous actions he had planned as soon as Jon turned his back. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Buell 2K said:

Janos Slynt resisted at first and then agreed.  He agreed to do what he was told.  Then Jon killed him anyway.  

The author wrote Janos Slynt as a duplicitous opportunist that tries kiss the boots of anyone he thinks will be in power- and not very consistently, mind you. He was not written as any sort of "good guy".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Fattest Leech said:

Jon does not have to "declare" anything. When the commander commands, you listen. When the shield that guards the realms of men says they need help, you listen.

Jon is remembering the true purpose of the watch, and that is KEY to the entire arc of his story, and Wetseros and humans as a whole.

 

You are forgetting the hypocrisy that Janos is showing here against his judgment of Jon.

First, Janos has never met Jon and literally starts his first interaction with Jon accusing him of something he himself did not witness. So again, Janos is not leaving any past judgements behind as he is prejudice against Jon from the get go for just being a Stark.

And then, to really rub it in, Janos takes the word of one of the unwashed-savage-whore-wildlings over the word of a brother of the Night's Watch, even though there are other brothers in the room at the time who where there at the battle that are defending Jon. Janos belives Rattleshirt over any other brother, and Thorne just laughs with it because he also has a chip on his shoulder against Starks.

You never know, but I doubt it because if you read then you will see that the schemeing and plotting comes from Janos- in the hot tub with the letter from Tywin discussion, and then several times after, and then the lies that Janos spread that remain even after his death.

Thorne did promise to be back... as what and under what mental state, I don't know for sure, but my bet is that of all the schemers, Thorne is the one to "see the light" and be one with the blue winter rose.

Are you seriously defending Slynt by supporting his boo-hoo crying that work will be too cold and too difficult? That is what it reads you are doing.

And the gate at Castle Black is open to free folk now, why would they risk lives to climb the wall for any reason when they are now (basically) welcomed.

There is a HUGE difference between the free folk and the wildlings. The term wildlings is a derogatory term much like the various ones in the real world. Free folk is the correct term. The actual wildlings are people like the Weeper and Rattleshirt and those few shitheads. Jon knows the difference because of his experiences with them. He saw them for what they are and not the exaggerations told through the southron realms. That is key to this story, and key to the heart of our hippie author.

That is pretty funny :D

Really? Jon's "tyranny"? The same guy who learns the truth about the free folk through actual experience, wants to save thousands from becoming wightified and part of the true foe, plans to rebuild the watch and grow food, saves a highborn girl from the deadly winter weather during an upcoming war for life??? Real tyrant.

Jon knows about the threat of the Others but he messes everything up because he just cannot separate himself from House Stark.  Sending Janos Slynt to solitary confinement would have been punishment enough.  Killing the guy only alienated the other brothers who supported Slynt and distrusted Jon.  And then the truth outs that Jon let Mance Rayder live and sent him to get his sister.  Jon killed a man for an offense when he himself was breaking all kinds of rules with his mission to get Arya away from Ramsay.  Jon is a hypocrite.  If Jon truly put the defense of Westeros as his first priority, he would not have interfered with Ramsay's business.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tagganaro said:

 Because Jon threatened to kill him.

It was even more than this, not just the threat of death... It wasn't until Jon had gone even farther, and had started the proceedings for the execution that Slynt agreed. It isn't until Slynt's head is literally on the block that he relents. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Fattest Leech said:

The author wrote Janos Slynt as a duplicitous opportunist that tries kiss the boots of anyone he thinks will be in power- and not very consistently, mind you. He was not written as any sort of "good guy".

Slynt is not a fine man, but it doesn't mean Jon was right to execute the guy.  Justice doesn't exist when the man passing judgment uses double-standards.  Janos and Mance are both sworn brothers of the watch who broke rules.  Hell, Mance's rule breaking exceeded Slynt's.  Jon killed one man and let the other walk.  That's not justice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Buell 2K said:

Janos Slynt resisted at first and then agreed.  He agreed to do what he was told.  Then Jon killed him anyway.  

You got to be kidding. Slynt "agreed" when his head was on the chopping block, not a moment before. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that Jon's decision was personal. But blaming him for everything happened is not fair. Harrenhall curse definitely brought Janos's life to end and Jon had no power to stop it just his great grandfather Aegon the Conqueror couldn't save Harren the Black, Aerys couldn't save Gargon Qoherys and so on. Littlefinger could have the same end as the ruler of Harrenhall and I want that to be justice and personal at the same time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Buell 2K said:

Slynt is not a fine man, but it doesn't mean Jon was right to execute the guy.  Justice doesn't exist when the man passing judgment uses double-standards.  Janos and Mance are both sworn brothers of the watch who broke rules.  Hell, Mance's rule breaking exceeded Slynt's.  Jon killed one man and let the other walk.  That's not justice.

He's not using double-standards.  Jon sees Mance as useful- Janos not so much.  Tough to disagree with him on that assessment knowing both guys as we do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Buell 2K said:

Jon knows about the threat of the Others but he messes everything up because he just cannot separate himself from House Stark. 

Ramsay threatening to kill the Lord Commander by cutting his heart out requires an answer. That is a more immediate threat to the realm.

Just now, Buell 2K said:

 

Sending Janos Slynt to solitary confinement would have been punishment enough. 

Except it shown to not be the case. Even after Slynt is dead, a few believe his lingering lies. And if anything, it would have made Slynt even angrier and more of prejudice zealot.

Just now, Buell 2K said:

 

Killing the guy only alienated the other brothers who supported Slynt and distrusted Jon. 

Where is that shown in the books?

Just now, Buell 2K said:

And then the truth outs that Jon let Mance Rayder live and sent him to get his sister.  Jon killed a man for an offense when he himself was breaking all kinds of rules with his mission to get Arya away from Ramsay.  Jon is a hypocrite. 

And you think the story between Jon and Mance is done??? Have you skipped all the parts where Jon addresses Mance's crimes??? If so, you have missed an abundance of foreshadowing.

Sorry this particular Jon/Mance subplot is not working out as fast as you want it to, but it will happen.

Just now, Buell 2K said:

If Jon truly put the defense of Westeros as his first priority, he would not have interfered with Ramsay's business.  

You, as a reader knowing the truth, can honestly type this with a straight face?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Buell 2K said:

Slynt is not a fine man, but it doesn't mean Jon was right to execute the guy.  Justice doesn't exist when the man passing judgment uses double-standards.  Janos and Mance are both sworn brothers of the watch who broke rules.  Hell, Mance's rule breaking exceeded Slynt's.  Jon killed one man and let the other walk.  That's not justice.

See my most recent response to you.

You seem to have missed the large amount of book text setting up a future Jon and Mance interaction :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

Its similar to how he behaved when Tyrion threatened him, his first reaction is anger then fear.

Yeah, and we clearly see the moment when his anger turns to fear, after Tyrion shows his claws:

Janos Slynt’s face had gone from red to white.

That never happens during the private talk with Jon, Slynt only becomes afraid the moment Jon announces the death sentence.

18 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

Did he really think himself untouchable? I dont think he was that stupid.

Well, he was. What else do you think all his bragging about his powerful friends means? 

“If the boy thinks that he can frighten me, he is mistaken,” they heard Lord Janos said. “He would not dare to hang me. Janos Slynt has friends, important friends, you’ll see …”

That's exactly the ramblings of a man who thinks himself too important to be done any harm. In other words, untouchable.

 

18 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

The Hand is the Hand, Cersei yells at KG when they dont listen to Tyrion saying something like the hand speaks with the voice of the king.

I'm not claiming that the Hand shouldn't be obeyed, only that he is not a commander of a military organisation.

 

16 minutes ago, Buell 2K said:

  That was personal and Jon was driven by his desire to get revenge for Ned. 

Yet everything in the chapter points the other way.

16 minutes ago, Buell 2K said:

Jon knew it was wrong and talked himself into killing Janos Slynt anyway.

A quote, please? The one time Jon thinks it is wrong, he goes for executing Slynt himself rather than having him hanged by others.

12 minutes ago, Buell 2K said:

Janos Slynt resisted at first and then agreed.  He agreed to do what he was told.  Then Jon killed him anyway.  

He resisted at first, and at second, and agreed only when his head was on the block because at that moment, he would have done anything to avoid death. About as convincing as a serial killer promising he won't do that again prior to being electrocuted.

6 minutes ago, Unacosamedarisa said:

No, he resisted, insulted Jon in private and stormed out of the room. Then, when given a second chance, he resisted, insulted Jon in public and tried to undermine him.

And being warned explicitely that this was the last chance.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Buell 2K said:

Slynt is not a fine man, but it doesn't mean Jon was right to execute the guy.  Justice doesn't exist when the man passing judgment uses double-standards.  Janos and Mance are both sworn brothers of the watch who broke rules.  Hell, Mance's rule breaking exceeded Slynt's.  Jon killed one man and let the other walk.  That's not justice.

After 20 pages of the previous thread and 5 pages of this, you are still harping on Jon let Mance go and killed Slynt. Care to elaborate on why you think Jon's decision was unjust other than "Jon killed one man and let the other walk". Several posters have provided detailed explanations on why they think the Synt and Mance situations are not comparable. I suggest you read that and make your case as to why their arguments are invalid. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Buell 2K said:

Slynt is not a fine man, but it doesn't mean Jon was right to execute the guy.  Justice doesn't exist when the man passing judgment uses double-standards.  Janos and Mance are both sworn brothers of the watch who broke rules.  Hell, Mance's rule breaking exceeded Slynt's.  Jon killed one man and let the other walk.  That's not justice.

This is really my main issue with the execution of Janos Slynt.  Jon letting Mance go.  

The execution itself was too severe in my opinion and not needed. The greater sin though is the way Jon handled Mance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Unacosamedarisa said:

Yes you are. You're asking "is Jon Joffrey?"... that's a comparison. You are comparing Jon's execution of Slynt to Joffrey's treatement of Sansa, when Tyrion educated his nephew on what happened to Aerys. 

Ok, I guess I am. Look, Jons story was not a success, hes "dead". He clearly made mistakes.

12 minutes ago, teej6 said:

How other people’s deaths affected certain characters’ narrative in the story does not automatically imply that Slynt’s death had a negative impact on Jon’s. It does not imply that Slynt was seen as a martyr or that his death influenced Marsh’s decision to kill Jon.

As for Jon being tyrannical, I don’t see any evidence to back that claim. The NW is not really a democratic institution, although they elect their LC. The LC’s word and ruling is final. Jon does consult his officers and consider their views. The fact that he does not agree with them does not make him a tyrant. Marsh is a bigot and couldn’t see beyond his own petty prejudices. Could Jon have tried harder to convince Marsh? Perhaps. But considering that Jon was preparing for the impending doom of Westeros and that nothing he said or did could/would convince the likes of Marsh, I doubt there was much else Jon could do.

Right, For the Slynauthor.i da crackpot. This is a theory due to long years in between books, i just like it.

They elect and can remove a LC while still functioning, its like Prince of Pentos without the legality. If Jon thinks hes untouchable like Janos theyre both ididots.

Fire Marsh. Or tell Edd to fetch another block. Obviously hindsights 20 20 but he was always dragging his feet.

17 minutes ago, The Fattest Leech said:

Jon does not have to "declare" anything. When the commander commands, you listen. When the shield that guards the realms of men says they need help, you listen.

Jon is remembering the true purpose of the watch, and that is KEY to the entire arc of his story, and Wetseros and humans as a whole.

You are forgetting the hypocrisy that Janos is showing here against his judgment of Jon.

First, Janos has never met Jon and literally starts his first interaction with Jon accusing him of something he himself did not witness. So again, Janos is not leaving any past judgements behind as he is prejudice against Jon from the get go for just being a Stark.

And then, to really rub it in, Janos takes the word of one of the unwashed-savage-whore-wildlings over the word of a brother of the Night's Watch, even though there are other brothers in the room at the time who where there at the battle that are defending Jon. Janos belives Rattleshirt over any other brother, and Thorne just laughs with it because he also has a chip on his shoulder against Starks.

Jon was unpopular among his men like Dany, commands get followed but sometimes they dont. Jons father and brother rose up in rebellion, he must know that.

Right Janos was a prick from the get go but we understand why, they're just incorrect reasons, and Rattleshirt spoke the truth, he killed Halfhand and gave an oath to Mance.

22 minutes ago, The Fattest Leech said:

You never know, but I doubt it because if you read then you will see that the schemeing and plotting comes from Janos- in the hot tub with the letter from Tywin discussion, and then several times after, and then the lies that Janos spread that remain even after his death.

Thorne did promise to be back... as what and under what mental state, I don't know for sure, but my bet is that of all the schemers, Thorne is the one to "see the light" and be one with the blue winter rose.

Are you seriously defending Slynt by supporting his boo-hoo crying that work will be too cold and too difficult? That is what it reads you are doing.

And the gate at Castle Black is open to free folk now, why would they risk lives to climb the wall for any reason when they are now (basically) welcomed.

There is a HUGE difference between the free folk and the wildlings. The term wildlings is a derogatory term much like the various ones in the real world. Free folk is the correct term. The actual wildlings are people like the Weeper and Rattleshirt and those few shitheads. Jon knows the difference because of his experiences with them. He saw them for what they are and not the exaggerations told through the southron realms. That is key to this story, and key to the heart of our hippie author.

I dont think Allisers gonna be a wight untill he does something exciting.

This is what I am doing. Its a terrible job, the fact that Jons "friends" can climb it makes it suspect.

The Weaper would attack though, not walk in.

I always thought they were all wildlings north of the wall, freefolk and thenns. I always thought it funny and disrespectful when they called Tyrions men wildlings. Very racist, theyre southron.

28 minutes ago, The Fattest Leech said:

That is pretty funny :D

Really? Jon's "tyranny"? The same guy who learns the truth about the free folk through actual experience, wants to save thousands from becoming wightified and part of the true foe, plans to rebuild the watch and grow food, saves a highborn girl from the deadly winter weather during an upcoming war for life??? Real tyrant.

It just rolls off the tounge.

The dude made crazy rules. Letting in the wildli- freefolk (sorry) was unheard of even if it is correct. Giving land to Stannis is crazy. Playing the game of thrones is crazy. I agree with almost every choice, but i see how public perception on this teenagers decisions seem tyrannical. Plus he went out like a tyrant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

 Jon letting Mance go. 

Jon didn't let him go. He stood there and watched his execution. When he executed Slynt, he thought Mance was gone. If you mean he didn't seize and kill him after, well, why would he? He wasn't his prisoner, he belonged to Melisandre and the king. And in any case, there was value in Mance that did not exist in Slynt.

It's worth bearing in mind that the lesson he learned from Halfhand was that all the vows were really in service to a goal: protecting the realms of men from what lay beyond the Wall. You could overlook a lot of things, countenance a lot of things, break all the vows if needs be, if it was in service to that purpose. Jon turned his cloak in the service of that duty, he lay with a woman in the service of that duty.

Mance is a lot of things, but one thing he is not is a traitor to mankind. His goal is to save as many of the free folk as he could from what was coming. Jon knew that, and knew that Mance would do anything to protect his people.

But Slynt? Slynt didn't know it. Slynt didn't care about the Watch. Slynt didn't care about anyone but himself. He attacked the institution itself in service of nothing more than his ambition. When Jon tried to steer him toward doing the duty that the Night's Watch exists for, he threw it back in Jon's face, in front of everyone.

Jon handled Slynt just fine, as the lack of criticism of his execution of Slynt shows. His view on Mance was fine, given that the existential crisis that the world is facing requires making allies in odd places. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hugorfonics said:

Janos doesnt trust Jon. Theres no reason for him to doubt Neds guilt, and bastards are stereotyped as untrustworthy. The fact that he was under investigation for being a turncloak (and a warg) capitalizes that. Jon did save everyone and win the battle, but Janos is an idiot (and wasnt there)

On the Wall, you leave behind your past and your family. This is why former criminals can get trust - their crimes are washed away, because they are defending the realm. Therefore, it is absolutely unfair to label a black brother as anyone's bastard. Someone who wants to be LC should study and uphold the principles of the NW.

Jon wasn't under investigation for anything. He had returned from a secret mission with important information, explained what he had done, and continued defending the Wall to the best of his abilities as the battle started - and no one asked any more questions until Slynt and Thorne arrived and started their petty, personal revenge instead of thinking of defending the Wall.  

Lord Commander Snow has no reason to trust Slynt. Yet, he tries. Slynt shows how unworthy he is. 

Quote

Honorable? Hes given a hard job that will take a long time to do, far from CB and all the action. Its also where Jon climbed so wildlings. Or whatever may try again soon, especially if theyre Jons friends like he thinks.

He is given an honourable, hard and important job in the defence of the Wall and the realm. What's the problem with the job being "hard" or taking a long time? He is not exactly on holiday (this is a penal, military colony), and the job is compatible with his alleged military experience and expertise (unless all he did in KL was killing women and children and taking bribes). If he is afraid of any climbers, it's his job to strengthen the defences. On the other hand, if he thinks he is unable to do this job, then he should try to explain it to the Lord Commander in a respectful way and to humbly ask for an easier and less demanding task (like cleaning the stables), instead of insulting the Lord Commander, who has tried to trust him although he has no particular reason to do so. That might have worked. 

Quote

So, I discovered that whenever a character dies the storys enhanced. Cause and effect, people dont die for no reason. Ned creates war, Joffrey creates trouble at KL, even cousin Frey gave Jaime a sword to attack Brienne with. Janos' death did little, which is shy i think it did a lot. Jons laws seemed crazy, like feeding wildlings or attacking Bolton. His tyranny can be traced back to executing Janos. 

Characters die all the time in ASOIAF. But yes, Jon "killed the boy" and became a real commander here. 

Not tyranny but leadership and responsibility, trying to save the realm. You can find tyrants in ASOIAF, but you may want to look for them elsewhere. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

Ok, I guess I am. Look, Jons story was not a success, hes "dead". He clearly made mistakes.

Real quickly because a freak storm just rolled though and killed my power (gotta save battery power now <_<), but to quote George from an interview where someone asked about Jon’s death (in the books, as if I had to clarify that), “Oh, you thinks he’s dead, do you?” 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

They elect and can remove a LC while still functioning, its like Prince of Pentos without the legality. If Jon thinks hes untouchable like Janos theyre both ididots.

Fire Marsh. Or tell Edd to fetch another block. Obviously hindsights 20 20 but he was always dragging his feet.

Jon was unpopular among his men like Dany, commands get followed but sometimes they dont. Jons father and brother rose up in rebellion, he must know that.

I believe a LC is elected for life.I don't recall a LC being removed from office, while still alive. I'm not sure how the earlier LCs described as bad were dealt with. 

I don't know where you get the idea that Jon thinks he's untouchable. Most times he knows men like Marsh are unhappy about his decisions, but Jon is motivated by what he believes is right for the realm of men. 

Can you provide a quote for the bolded section. We know officers like Marsh and Yarwyck disagree with Jon's decisions but that does not automatically translate to Jon was unpopular among his men. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Ygrain said:

Yeah, and we clearly see the moment when his anger turns to fear, after Tyrion shows his claws:

Janos Slynt’s face had gone from red to white.

That never happens during the private talk with Jon, Slynt only becomes afraid the moment Jon announces the death sentence.

Well, he was. What else do you think all his bragging about his powerful friends means? 

“If the boy thinks that he can frighten me, he is mistaken,” they heard Lord Janos said. “He would not dare to hang me. Janos Slynt has friends, important friends, you’ll see …”

That's exactly the ramblings of a man who thinks himself too important to be done any harm. In other words, untouchable.

 

I'm not claiming that the Hand shouldn't be obeyed, only that he is not a commander of a military organisation.

Word, i guess he wasmt scared.

I guess he was an idiot, one doesnt dream up friends though. I do think Jon angered a large portion of people Janos considered his friends, hence for the slynt.

Of course he is though, its the Hand. Certainly the city watch and KG and just as certainly the sellswords. Now can Tyrion command Tywin or Mace? Good question, can Joffrey? Its the same question because the Hand speaks with the Kings voice.

2 minutes ago, Julia H. said:

On the Wall, you leave behind your past and your family. This is why former criminals can get trust - their crimes are washed away, because they are defending the realm. Therefore, it is absolutely unfair to label a black brother as anyone's bastard. Someone who wants to be LC should study and uphold the principles of the NW.

Jon wasn't under investigation for anything. He had returned from a secret mission with important information, explained what he had done, and continued defending the Wall to the best of his abilities as the battle started - and no one asked any more questions until Slynt and Thorne arrived and started their petty, personal revenge instead of thinking of defending the Wall.  

Lord Commander Snow has no reason to trust Slynt. Yet, he tries. Slynt shows how unworthy he is. 

I dont know how much Jon trusts Slynt, but its as much as Slynt lets him

The guys an ass, but if you put yourself in his shoes his motivation doesnt seem malicious like other characters, i.e Euron, Cersei

5 minutes ago, Julia H. said:

He is given an honourable, hard and important job in the defence of the Wall and the realm. What's the problem with the job being "hard" or taking a long time? He is not exactly on holiday (this is a penal, military colony), and the job is compatible with his alleged military experience and expertise (unless all he did in KL was killing women and children and taking bribes). If he is afraid of any climbers, it's his job to strengthen the defences. On the other hand, if he thinks he is unable to do this job, then he should try to explain it to the Lord Commander in a respectful way and to humbly ask for an easier and less demanding task (like cleaning the stables), instead of insulting the Lord Commander, who has tried to trust him although he has no particular reason to do so. That might have worked. z

Characters die all the time in ASOIAF. But yes, Jon "killed the boy" and became a real commander here. 

Not tyranny but leadership and responsibility, trying to save the realm. You can find tyrants in ASOIAF, but you may want to look for them elsewhere. 

Janos thinks Jon is in league with wildlings, he knows they can climb Greywatch like Jon did. Its kind of suspect 

Do they? Kevan amd Pycelle seem weird but im sure theres a reason. Kill the boy, ok but Janos is no boy and he already sent away Sam and Baby Maester

I agree with most of his decisions but they were handaled with bad pr or he wouldnt have been killed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...