GloubieBoulga Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 Jon predicted his own death, I fear, mocking Arya (Arya I, AGOT): When the spring thaw comes, they will find your body with a needle still locked tight between your frozen fingers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starkz Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 Just now, wia said: I think GRRM made it pretty clear that the story is an endless loop with all the repeating events throughout the history. What I don't see happening is 'good' winning over the evil, the restoration of Targaryens, people suddenly wanting Jon to be the king of Westeros 'cause of R+L, peace and happiness and all other Dysney-style endings. Doesn't seem to fit ASOIAF at all imo. What I see as a bitter-sweet ending is that some sort of victory will be achieved at the cost of many lives, yet the danger is always there and defeating the Others doesn't really fix any of the existing social problems because the cause of those problems is human nature, not some ice zombies. GRRM does draw heavy influence from LoTR, so I wouldn’t rule any ending out. I don’t think history is going to repeat itself again with the Others, I could of course be completely wrong. I just don’t see the series ending in such a way where it’s set to repeat thousands of years later or what not making it a third, fourth time etc. I believe the purpose of the Others will eventually be revealed and one way or another the threat of the Others will cease to exist. I believe the “bittersweet” ending will be Winterfell being destroyed and Wildfire being set off in KL, as Aerys once planned to do and a bunch of people dying. Also, fo the Others to make an impact in the story/7K they’ll have to get past the Wall, which probably means the Wall will be destroyed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Lannister Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 30 minutes ago, Starkz said: Singling out one specific character, claiming he shouldn’t have a position of power due to the mutiny i.e “lack of success”, is incredibly bias. You’re neglecting how worse off every other leader is doing and everything he’s done. Furthermore, Jon was successfully leading the NW and fell prey to the prejudice NW members, how does that make you “unsuccessful”? Every leader ever has had people that didn’t like them and stood against them. Obviously Jon knew the NW wouldn’t like the Wildlings coming through the Wall, but what choice did he have? Let them all die and turn to wights, or save them by bringing them through? If not evident by Marsh second guessing every single decision Jon made, Jon knew Marsh didn’t like him/what he was doing. You’re neglecting every single thing Jon has done and basing his performance as a leader based on how his last chapter ended, that’s called being biased. Ceaser was one of the best leaders Rome had, because he was killed doesn’t change that fact. Yeah.... completely unreasonable of me to single out a character.... on a thread about a single character. Jon has too much of that Stark state of mind. Sure he's a great person, but he doesn't have the flexibility to successfully manage people of conflicting ideologies and interests. It got Ned and Robb killed, and Jon as well. So given this track record can't say I think he'd be a good Hand or King. Not that I think he's destined to live that long. You're right that Jon knew Marsh was up to no good and did nothing about it. Melisandre even warned him, but he chose to ignore the problem until the knives were piercing his flesh. Also not sure if the Ceasar reference is one I'd consider relevant. Other than the fact they both got stabbed by their comrades. Ceasar was killed because he seized power in a move that transitioned the Republic to the Empire. Unless you're arguing Jon just needs to become a dictator and seize power... slightly out of character for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starkz Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 15 minutes ago, Lord Lannister said: Yeah.... completely unreasonable of me to single out a character.... on a thread about a single character. Jon has too much of that Stark state of mind. Sure he's a great person, but he doesn't have the flexibility to successfully manage people of conflicting ideologies and interests. It got Ned and Robb killed, and Jon as well. So given this track record can't say I think he'd be a good Hand or King. Not that I think he's destined to live that long. You're right that Jon knew Marsh was up to no good and did nothing about it. Melisandre even warned him, but he chose to ignore the problem until the knives were piercing his flesh. Also not sure if the Ceasar reference is one I'd consider relevant. Other than the fact they both got stabbed by their comrades. Ceasar was killed because he seized power in a move that transitioned the Republic to the Empire. Unless you're arguing Jon just needs to become a dictator and seize power... slightly out of character for him. Jon was successfully managing the Wildlings and NW, of whom have many prejudices toward one another and differences. Just because some extremists thought killing him would solve something(killing Jon doesn’t help the NW in anyway), doesn’t mean he was unsuccesful. The Wildlings were ready to follow him into battle and perhaps some of the NW, though I imagine most would abstain. I’m comparing the fact that you refer to Jon as unsuccesful because of the attempt on his life to Ceaser who was killed, of which didn’t negate the fact that he was a very successful leader/ruler. In regards to Marsh, there’s not much you can do as he’s in a position of power and hasn’t openly acted out against him and what Marsh did was extreme, especially given the circumstances and the place of which he did it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daemon The Black Dragon Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 11 hours ago, Lord Lannister said: Jon couldn't even successfully manage a thousand or so Night's Watch men and their politics. He doesn't have the bend necessary for it, so I'm not sure giving him a larger position would be doing anyone any favors. You don't think Jon can learn from his mistakes and not repeat them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wia Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 46 minutes ago, Starkz said: GRRM does draw heavy influence from LoTR, so I wouldn’t rule any ending out. I don’t think history is going to repeat itself again with the Others, I could of course be completely wrong. I just don’t see the series ending in such a way where it’s set to repeat thousands of years later or what not making it a third, fourth time etc. I believe the purpose of the Others will eventually be revealed and one way or another the threat of the Others will cease to exist. I believe the “bittersweet” ending will be Winterfell being destroyed and Wildfire being set off in KL, as Aerys once planned to do and a bunch of people dying. Also, fo the Others to make an impact in the story/7K they’ll have to get past the Wall, which probably means the Wall will be destroyed. GRRM did say that LOTR had a lot of influence on him and that it's on of his favorite books. But he also said that he's a very different kind of writer writing a different kind of story. Spoiler Quote Ruling is hard. This was maybe my answer to Tolkien, whom, as much as I admire him, I do quibble with. Lord of the Rings had a very medieval philosophy: that if the king was a good man, the land would prosper. We look at real history and it’s not that simple. Tolkien can say that Aragorn became king and reigned for a hundred years, and he was wise and good. But Tolkien doesn’t ask the question: What was Aragorn’s tax policy? Did he maintain a standing army? What did he do in times of flood and famine? And what about all these orcs? By the end of the war, Sauron is gone but all of the orcs aren’t gone – they’re in the mountains. Did Aragorn pursue a policy of systematic genocide and kill them? Even the little baby orcs, in their little orc cradles? --- The war that Tolkien wrote about was a war for the fate of civilization and the future of humanity, and that’s become the template. I’m not sure that it’s a good template, though. The Tolkien model led generations of fantasy writers to produce these endless series of dark lords and their evil minions who are all very ugly and wear black clothes. But the vast majority of wars throughout history are not like that. --- I have always found grey characters more interesting than those who are pure black and white. I have no qualms with the way that Tolkien handled Sauron, but in some ways The Lord of the Rings set an unfortunate example for the writers who were to follow. I did not want to write another version of the War Between Good and Evil, where the antagonist is called the Foul King or the Demon Lord or Prince Rotten, and his minions are slavering subhumans dressed all in black (I dressed my Night's Watch, who are basically good guys, all in black in part to undermine that annoying convention). Before you can fight the war between good and evil, you need to determine which is which, and that's not always as easy as some Fantasists would have you believe. --- You have to be aware of them but you have to smash them with hammers and make up your own. Tolkien twisted an old cliché of elves (tiny faeries) into something else - met with resistance from his editors at first, arguing over what an elf or dwarf is. Now Tolkien is the cliché. Can’t just regurgitate them you have to do something with them. Winterfell is pretty much destroyed already. Not sure what destroying the crypts would lead to, since everyone there is dead anyway. For 5 books the Others weren't an issue for 99% of people in Westeros. For 8,000 years they weren't a problem for 100% of people in Westeros. People were. And people won't change, they'll go on repeating the history. Defeating the Others won't really change people, but might give them a push to move on on a new, a little bit improved cycle maybe. But of course we won't know till the 7th book is out. )) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corvo the Crow Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 A maester. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norwaywolf123 Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 18 hours ago, wia said: LC of the NW seems like a great place for him. Far superior to being a lord or king. And he isn't even Dany's type, idg why people ship it. The GOT television series played a big part in that, me thinks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wia Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 1 minute ago, norwaywolf123 said: The GOT television series played a big part in that, me thinks. Yea... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starkz Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 37 minutes ago, wia said: GRRM did say that LOTR had a lot of influence on him and that it's on of his favorite books. But he also said that he's a very different kind of writer writing a different kind of story. Hide contents Winterfell is pretty much destroyed already. Not sure what destroying the crypts would lead to, since everyone there is dead anyway. For 5 books the Others weren't an issue for 99% of people in Westeros. For 8,000 years they weren't a problem for 100% of people in Westeros. People were. And people won't change, they'll continue to repeating the history. Defeating the Others won't really change people, but might give them a push to on on a new, a little bit improved cycle maybe. But of course we won't know till the 7th book is out. )) What you’ve just said is what I imagine will happen. The Others and defeating them combined with Winter and all the destruction will be a wake up call to begin to rebuild and change their ways/unify. I never mentioned the crypts, I just meant in general Winterfell would be destroyed as in just rubble and ash and need to be totally rebuilt. 8000 years ago Westeros wasn’t as unified as it is now, though right now isn’t a very good example, I believe total unification will come towards the end of the series. Ideally, in the Disney ending Jon and Dany ruling would unite every Kingdom but there are a lot of candidates who could. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wia Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 7 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said: A maester. Now this is fresh. Mind elaborating on that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corvo the Crow Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 Just now, wia said: Now this is fresh. Mind elaborating on that? Because maesters preserve knowledge, it was a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wia Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 6 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said: Because maesters preserve knowledge, it was a joke. And here I am, wearing my tinfoil hat in anticipation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Commentator Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 19 hours ago, Prince Yourwetdream Aeryn said: What is Jon Snow capable of: Protector of North, King of Westeros, Dany's consort or Hand of the King? He's capable of staying dead. It's repetitive plotting for him to come back to life. There's Beric and Catelyn already. It's too repetitive. But very well, for the sake of answer your question, here goes. Capable as in able? Well, we know he's a a gigantic failure as a leader. He can't stick to his duties when one of the other Starks are in trouble. And they often are, those scrubs. Jon can't put duty ahead of family. He's poor at communicating. He failed to convince his brothers at the wall of the threat that might possibly come. He practices fickle justice. He lacks professional ethics and he violates justice. So what is he capable of? It's not ruling. Jon will be totally ineffective as a ruler. That rules out consort to Queen Daenerys and Hand of the Queen. Jon would do best with the Wildlings because he has trouble following rules. He can be some kind of tribal leader for the wildlings because these people don't care too much for rules and duties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corvo the Crow Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 2 minutes ago, Widowmaker 811 said: He's capable of staying dead. It's repetitive plotting for him to come back to life. There's Beric and Catelyn already. It's too repetitive. But very well, for the sake of answer your question, here goes. Capable as in able? Well, we know he's a a gigantic failure as a leader. He can't stick to his duties when one of the other Starks are in trouble. And they often are, those scrubs. Jon can't put duty ahead of family. He's poor at communicating. He failed to convince his brothers at the wall of the threat that might possibly come. He practices fickle justice. He lacks professional ethics and he violates justice. So what is he capable of? It's not ruling. Jon will be totally ineffective as a ruler. That rules out consort to Queen Daenerys and Hand of the Queen. Jon would do best with the Wildlings because he has trouble following rules. He can be some kind of tribal leader for the wildlings because these people don't care too much for rules and duties. Family. Duty. Honor. Jon is more a Tully than Cat is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Commentator Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 Just now, Corvo the Crow said: Family. Duty. Honor. Jon is more a Tully than Cat is! Which is fine for a family man with no other responsibilities outside of the family. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wia Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 8 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said: Family. Duty. Honor. Jon is more a Tully than Cat is! The mystery of Jon's parents is solved! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lollygag Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 Potentially sure. But his political skills of a certain variety are scraping the bottom of the barrel and he'd have to overcome that. It just wasn't anything he came across at Winterfell or in the NW to any great degree. Based on this quote below, Jon would quickly fall flat on his face regardless of his other skills and qualifications. ADWD Jon II "Janos Slynt," said Jon. Gods save us. "A man does not rise to command of the gold cloaks without ability. Slynt was born a butcher's son. He was captain of the Iron Gate when Manly Stokeworth died, and Jon Arryn raised him up and put the defense of King's Landing into his hands. Lord Janos cannot be as great a fool as he seems." And I want him well away from Alliser Thorne. He also overheard Marsh & Co. conspiring with Tywin and did nothing about this and didn't let it factor into his decisions. Not that I think he should have made different decisions, just handled them better given he knew Tywin was involved. He didn't see that his association with Stannis would be a problem for those he knew to be Lannister/IT/traditionalist guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Yourwetdream Aeryn Posted October 30, 2018 Author Share Posted October 30, 2018 43 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said: Family. Duty. Honor. Jon is more a Tully than Cat is! Tully motto doesn't say that family is important than duty and honor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starkz Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 1 hour ago, Widowmaker 811 said: He's capable of staying dead. It's repetitive plotting for him to come back to life. There's Beric and Catelyn already. It's too repetitive. But very well, for the sake of answer your question, here goes. Capable as in able? Well, we know he's a a gigantic failure as a leader. He can't stick to his duties when one of the other Starks are in trouble. And they often are, those scrubs. Jon can't put duty ahead of family. He's poor at communicating. He failed to convince his brothers at the wall of the threat that might possibly come. He practices fickle justice. He lacks professional ethics and he violates justice. So what is he capable of? It's not ruling. Jon will be totally ineffective as a ruler. That rules out consort to Queen Daenerys and Hand of the Queen. Jon would do best with the Wildlings because he has trouble following rules. He can be some kind of tribal leader for the wildlings because these people don't care too much for rules and duties. It’s saddening to see how close minded and tunnel visioned some people are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.