Jump to content
Kaapstad

HBO’s own inconsistency with Jon’s ending.

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, TheFirstofHerName said:

I don’t think we are suppose to worry about whether he truly abandoned the NW or not.  The point is that he is getting to range or roam in the North where he truly belongs and amongst people who accept and respect him. Afterall.....if a raven was sent saying they needed Jon back at the wall then he would come in a wink of an eye.   That is the kind of person Jon is. 

But it would be a big difference. If he did abandon his sentence, he's a turncloak and would not be welcomed back at the watch. If he was just 'ranging' then he is stuck as a member of the NW, making his journey pointless, as he ended up where he started.

The fact that HBO is ambiguous even in its summaries says a lot about how little thought was given about concluding the show in a sensible manner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Apoplexy said:

But it would be a big difference. If he did abandon his sentence, he's a turncloak and would not be welcomed back at the watch. If he was just 'ranging' then he is stuck as a member of the NW, making his journey pointless, as he ended up where he started.

The fact that HBO is ambiguous even in its summaries says a lot about how little thought was given about concluding the show in a sensible manner.

The alternative ending which is almost the same as this one  has both Jorah and him coming out of the tunnel. Now I think we can extrapolate that if Jorah was going with him they weren’t going to live with the wildlings but were both NW. But then that’s an alternative ending. 

Edited by Kaapstad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Kaapstad said:

The alternative ending which is almost the same as this one  has both Jorah and him coming out of the tunnel. Now I think we can extrapolate that if Jorah was going with him they weren’t going to live with the wildlings but were both NW. But then that’s an alternative ending. 

I personally thought that Jon left with the wildlings to live amongst them. That's what I thought was the significance of the gate closing behind him.

On a side note, I would've liked Jorah taking the black. I found it really depressing that he pined for Dany all those years and then died for her. But that's just me.

Share this post


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

I really believe GRRM will handle the Jon part differently as he is the only character in the ending who completely lacks a sense of purpose.  [...] It’s weird but Jon seems to be the only character without any purpose for him at the end. We can come up with headcanons but nothing concrete was established on the show like for the other characters. All we see is him wearing the NW uniform and going with the wildlings. That’s literally it. Zero concrete info on his life objectives from hereon in. He is just 22-23 years old. What’s he going to do for the rest of his life?

Why do you think he needs a "sense of purpose"? Why does a book have to end that way?

Plus you forget that Jon isn't Jon anymore. He's an undead fire wight. That means that his "purpose" at his death is now permanently locked in and cannot change. He is the shield that guards the realms of men. Period. Forever. He doesn't get to have anything else. He's undead.

Share this post


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

It’s weird but Jon seems to be the only character without any purpose for him at the end. We can come up with headcanons but nothing concrete was established on the show like for the other characters. All we see is him wearing the NW uniform and going with the wildlings. That’s literally it. Zero concrete info on his life objectives from hereon in. He is just 22-23 years old. What’s he going to do for the rest of his life?

That is only true if one has no respect or love for the Night Watch or wildlings or that exploring the far North is not as adventuresome as Ayra’s sea adventures. Jon was raised to believe it was honorable to serve in the NW and Ned told him Starks had manned the Wall for thousands of years.  Makes me think of the saying that says one man’s trash is another man’s treasure.  Additionally....Jon has already served his purpose narratively and that was helping to save the world from destruction by ice and fire.   But life is full of possibilities (as Tyrion once said) and the realm could call upon him again for his service in the future. Meanwhile....let him roam free, breathe the air, marvel at nature, and enjoy companionship of his friends.

Share this post


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

But it would be a big difference. If he did abandon his sentence, he's a turncloak and would not be welcomed back at the watch. If he was just 'ranging' then he is stuck as a member of the NW, making his journey pointless, as he ended up where he started.

Why is a "There and Back Again" journey somehow a "pointless" one?

Share this post


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

But it would be a big difference. If he did abandon his sentence, he's a turncloak and would not be welcomed back at the watch. If he was just 'ranging' then he is stuck as a member of the NW, making his journey pointless, as he ended up where he started.

The fact that HBO is ambiguous even in its summaries says a lot about how little thought was given about concluding the show in a sensible manner.

His journey was not pointless.  Jon’s character has always been about servanthood.  He served the realm well and help save them from ice and fire.  As Bran said.....he was where he was suppose to be.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I took the shot of him looking back at the closing gate as him turning his back on the Southern world, Night's Watch included (cause wtf are they watching for anyway?), for good. Bran knew the organization was in shambles/barely existed and used it as an out for Jon to go live with the Wildlings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, CrypticWeirwood said:

Why is a "There and Back Again" journey somehow a "pointless" one?

 

3 hours ago, TheFirstofHerName said:

His journey was not pointless.  Jon’s character has always been about servanthood.  He served the realm well and help save them from ice and fire.  As Bran said.....he was where he was suppose to be.   

I don't buy that Jon's journey has been about servitude. For me, his journey has been about finding his place in this world (and I don't think it's servitude). He was always an outsider in the Stark household, he joined the NW because he thought that would be his place. He tries and fails to be truly a part of the NW. He wants to desert when Robb is killed, contemplates staying with Ygritte forever and he cannot help himself from wanting to help his step sisters.

For me, Jon was a Stark. He may have been half targ, but he was raised a Stark and always acted like a Stark. Him going back to the NW would be him going back to a place where he never fit in in the first place. That's why I say it's pointless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Apoplexy said:

I don't buy that Jon's journey has been about servitude.

I did not say servitude. I said servanthood. Jon’s basic personality or character is one whose natural inclination is to protect and put the needs others before his own.  This is called servanthood leadership style.  He chooses to serve others by choice and not as a slave.   He is unselfish and devoid of worldly ambitions which keep him from succumbing to greed and corruption.   He is a man of honor and duty.  He will sacrifice his own well being for others. Admirable qualities although some may deem as dumb choices at times.   He brought the wildlings beyond the wall for their safety and to unite with the rest of the realm to defeat the Night King so I don’t see his time at The Wall as a failure.   His desire to leave and fight for Robb, stay with Ygritte, and whether or not to kill Dany were a series of tests where he was forced to make hard moral choices.  The choices he ultimately made were true to his basic character.  Others before himself.   I guess we will just have to agree to disagree about how we view Jon and his ending.  I have really said all I care to say for now but will certainly be reading the last two books to see if I feel differently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I personally believe that Jon went beyond the Wall to live with the Wildlings. The implications of the alternative, that he is still going to function as a member of the Night's Watch, is just too dumb for me to believe. The entire purpose of the Night's Watch, its sole reason to exist, is to man the Wall in defense against the Others (it later was corrupted into manning the Wall against the Wildlings). That function is no longer possible since 1) the Wall has a giant gaping hole in it, and 2) the Others no longer exist (and the Wildlings are now friends with the people south of the Wall). On top of that, the NW was already depleted in terms of membership to the point of near collapse even before the Others rampaged through. At the end of episode 6, as far as the audience knows, Jon is the ONLY member of the NW left (even Sam no longer keeps his vows). The idea that Jon would live out the rest of his days completely alone at Castle Black defending the realm against absolutely nothing is stupid to the point of being insulting. 

Edited by aquintus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, aquintus said:

I personally believe that Jon went beyond the Wall to live with the Wildlings. The implications of the alternative, that he is still going to function as a member of the Night's Watch, is just too dumb for me to believe. The entire purpose of the Night's Watch, its sole reason to exist, is to man the Wall in defense against the Others (it later was corrupted into manning the Wall against the Wildlings). That function is no longer possible since 1) the Wall has a giant gaping hole in it, and 2) the Others no longer exist (and the Wildlings are now friends with the people south of the Wall). On top of that, the NW was already depleted in terms of membership to the point of near collapse even before the Others rampaged through. At the end of episode 6, as far as the audience knows, Jon is the ONLY member of the NW left (even Sam no longer keeps his vows). The idea that Jon would live out the rest of his days completely alone at Castle Black defending the realm against absolutely nothing is stupid to the point of being insulting. 

There were 4 NW recruits at castle black. He wasn’t alone there.  Sam’s status is completely stupid. He has literally done nothing apart from scrubbing chamber pots and he is a grandmaster without a single link forged. 

Edited by Kaapstad

Share this post


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

There were 4 NW recruits at castle black. He wasn’t alone there. 

Even then, that's still only 5 total members. That's not even enough people to functionally run a keep, much less be an entire military organization (or penal colony, or whatever). The idea that the NW would continue to exist after the Others are defeated is just dumb. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, CrypticWeirwood said:

Why do you think he needs a "sense of purpose"? Why does a book have to end that way?

Plus you forget that Jon isn't Jon anymore. He's an undead fire wight. That means that his "purpose" at his death is now permanently locked in and cannot change. He is the shield that guards the realms of men. Period. Forever. He doesn't get to have anything else. He's undead.

Jon liked progressing up the rank in the Nights Watch. He always wanted to be a ranger like Benjen so he could explore to his hearts content. In the books it’s implied that he wanted to be lord of Winterfell. He even advises Stannis politically when he shouldn’t have. He shows pride at being called King in the North. It’s clear when he tells Dany "I don’t need your permission. I am a king". His ending as a hermit doing nothing but hunt, eat and drink doesn’t fit how he acted in the story. In fact him deserting the NW with the wildlings also ignores a couple of prior aspects with the story. Last time he deserted it, he made sure to leave back his uniform and change back into Stark clothes. And that was only because he had died and the vow no longer applied.

Stannis offered to pardon him and make him Jon Stark and an opportunity to free Winterfell when he knew the Boltons were flaying people alive and were the ones who were responsible for butchering his family. He still sticks to the NW. He is honourable to a flaw and him deserting with the wildlings so openly wearing NW gear doesn’t fit his character but then again, who knows, maybe he did? The HBO synopsis says he didn’t. Their blog says he did. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, aquintus said:

Even then, that's still only 5 total members. That's not even enough people to functionally run a keep, much less be an entire military organization (or penal colony, or whatever). The idea that the NW would continue to exist after the Others are defeated is just dumb. 

Tyrion said they will continue to send people there as it’s a place for bastards and broken men. And he did take the vows. Tyrion told him, he shall father no children, take no wife etc. And he left wearing NW uniform, not Stark clothes. Last time he left, he had given back the uniform before leaving. 

What I don’t get is if it was all a trick to fool grey worm, why did Tyrion tell him that he was going to be stuck to the wall, he shall have to take his vows, and he would meet him in a few years at the wall instead of being upfront with him that this was a trick to send him with the wildlings. Jon knows the wildlings are there at the Nights Watch. So why ask Arya to visit him at Castle Black if he wasn’t going to stay there and why even show those 4 recruits if NW doesn’t exist and ask him to say the vow

Here’s how it should go. With no ambiguity. He gets pardoned because he is the rightful heir to the iron throne. Jon abdicates in favour of Bran, tells Sansa and the others that he has no interest in ruling over everyone and that he plans to go with Tormund and the others. And we see him with Wildling clothes or Stark clothes moving out of the Tunnel with Tormund and Ghost. The ending sets in stone Jon is now a wildlings. Why even put all these contradicting bits and pieces here and there? Why not make it straightforward and simple? In fact why not mention it in the summaries and their blog? Why all this beating around the bush is going on?

Edited by Kaapstad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, TheFirstofHerName said:

That is only true if one has no respect or love for the Night Watch or wildlings or that exploring the far North is not as adventuresome as Ayra’s sea adventures. Jon was raised to believe it was honorable to serve in the NW and Ned told him Starks had manned the Wall for thousands of years.  Makes me think of the saying that says one man’s trash is another man’s treasure.  Additionally....Jon has already served his purpose narratively and that was helping to save the world from destruction by ice and fire.   But life is full of possibilities (as Tyrion once said) and the realm could call upon him again for his service in the future. Meanwhile....let him roam free, breathe the air, marvel at nature, and enjoy companionship of his friends.

I may be in the minority here but I never really thought his relationships with the wildlings was ever that good. If there was Ygritte or Val on the other side I would agree with you but there is just Tormund. I compare that to his relationship with Mormont, Sam, Edd, Pyp, Glenn and Arya and Sansa and it still isn’t that emotional or close. I would put Jon’s relationship with Tormund on the same footing as that with Tyrion, he knows him and they are friends but that’s it. His relationship with Sam was far more developed and I would have liked it if Arya or Sam or Tyrion had gone with him as it would help me shake off this feeling of loneliness with Jon. They tried to put in his line where Jon says "I wish I was going with you" but it’s a case of show not tell. His relationship with his NW brothers was developed on screen, not the wildlings which is why I stick to him ending up with the NW at Castle Black as he can meet his family and still go out on long missions with the wildlings (although there is nothing of interest there just my opinion).  I also think Jon’s broken record of "I don’t want it" ever since he was resurrected kept being brought up so as to force us to believe he loved the wildlings and the Show Jon is completely unlike the book Jon who imo is ambitious and smart and GRRM will do a much better job at this.

I think the reason this is the case is mainly because they had the books to flesh out his relationships with the Nights Watch while the moment the wildlings came on to the scene they ran out of material so there is no group of friends on the wildlings side in the show. They just rushed through it with not much development.  It’s possible GRRM would address this in his 3000 pages books and make me believe it but then that’s s decade from now. 

Edited by Kaapstad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, legba11 said:

I just don't see how that defines that he (significantly later) defines that he abandons his post at the NW.  At that point, Tormund is going to back to his place at and maybe further, it is unknown.  Tormund is saying he (Jon) is a wildling at heart, but the wildlings now man the Wall and live on both sides of it.

The only indicator we get from the material on screen is that Jon is still wearing his cloak, which is the defining symbol of the NW.  That is hardly definitive, but it points in the opposite direction for whatever weight you give it.

That is also contradicted by his glance back at the door closing and then smiling and then him fading into the forest. That’s cinema symbolism for a character who leaves never to return again.  The blog says he belongs among the wildlings so it supports that he leaves. 

Edited by Kaapstad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, Apoplexy said:

I personally thought that Jon left with the wildlings to live amongst them. That's what I thought was the significance of the gate closing behind him.

On a side note, I would've liked Jorah taking the black. I found it really depressing that he pined for Dany all those years and then died for her. But that's just me.

Hmm maybe. That’s one intrepretation if it. Also possible he was just looking back to see if they all made it out, then reminisce about the last time he went beyond the wall to bring them back and now he is leading them back there. It could be anything. They seem to shirk back from giving him a definitive end. In the synopsis and blog why not simply say, "Jon Snow leaves to stay with the Wildlings where he belongs". Why all this playing with words and not wanting to set it in stone. And if this is truly where they wanted him to end up why even bring the Nights Watch into it at all? Just tell Grey Worm, he will be banished from Westeros beyond the wall where he would live out the rest of his days and he won’t be allowed to return. That’s just as much a punishment as the NW. Why was the NW even mentioned?

Edited by Kaapstad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, TheFirstofHerName said:

I did not say servitude. I said servanthood. Jon’s basic personality or character is one whose natural inclination is to protect and put the needs others before his own.  This is called servanthood leadership style.  He chooses to serve others by choice and not as a slave.   He is unselfish and devoid of worldly ambitions which keep him from succumbing to greed and corruption.   He is a man of honor and duty.  He will sacrifice his own well being for others. Admirable qualities although some may deem as dumb choices at times.   He brought the wildlings beyond the wall for their safety and to unite with the rest of the realm to defeat the Night King so I don’t see his time at The Wall as a failure.   His desire to leave and fight for Robb, stay with Ygritte, and whether or not to kill Dany were a series of tests where he was forced to make hard moral choices.  The choices he ultimately made were true to his basic character.  Others before himself.   I guess we will just have to agree to disagree about how we view Jon and his ending.  I have really said all I care to say for now but will certainly be reading the last two books to see if I feel differently.

Not parsing servitude and servanthood, I guess we disagree. 

My argument is that his admirable qualities (I do find them admirable, I don't think he is stupid or naive because of them) do not necessarily imply his journey is about about service. For me personally, the whole Jon going back to the NW was a bit fatalistic. And of course, you are free to disagree.

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

×