Jon Snow, the Coldheart

[kissdbyfire]

1 minute ago, Many-Faced Votary said:

I agree! I was referring more to the big-picture politics that he didn't bother to explain ("Stannis fights for the realm; the Ironborn for plunder"), and to the breaks in tradition that have a huge impact in the internal politics of the Watch (Satin being the Lord Commander's squire, for millennia a position for highborn boys being groomed for command). Both were obviously good things, but he did not provide the full justification, and in the former case it made him look corrupt from the outside.

Yeah… but for instance, irt Satin he did provide a reasonable explanation and yet Marsh’s bigotry wouldn’t allow him to see the truth and logic of what Jon was saying. And they got to a crunch time moment w/ everything that was happening… When do you give up on trying to convince someone like Marsh that they’re just wrong? I would have given up way way sooner than Jon did tbh. Another thing is, Jon heard Marsh & others conspiring  to do Tywin fucking Lannister’s bidding back in ASoS, so really, how many more times should Jon have tried to make them understand? Of course this question will be answered differently by different people, but as I’ve said, I would have given up a lot sooner than Jon did. 

[Many-Faced Votary]

You're right. Jon has incredible patience, and he had justified and compromised more than I could imagine most people doing.

He really reminds me a lot of another character whom he seems to parallel very often and who did the exact same thing!

[Springwatch]

18 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

How many times has Jon tried to explain things to Marsh, Yarwick, and other? How many meetings did they have about all these issues? Plenty.

He did not explain about the food.

[Many-Faced Votary]

1 minute ago, Springwatch said:

He did not explain about the food.

Which instance are you referring to? Jon took a loan from the Iron Bank to purchase food from the south, on Bowen's advice, actually.

[SeanF]

1 hour ago, Many-Faced Votary said:

The thing is, they are always marked by naked xenophobia, at one time so blatant that he suggested what was effectively genocide without batting an eye. Bowen Marsh is not evil per se, but he is a fundamentally bad and uncompassionate person, and his arguments always boil down to three things: self-preservation (contingent on believing without evidence that the Free Folk are a threat to him and to the Watch), disliking change, and the xenophobia that accompanies both.

We see where they are both coming from in every respect, and it is Jon who has the moral high ground each time, Jon who thinks the matter through instead of superficially, Jon who fulfills the spirit of the Night's Watch's oath. At one point, Bowen even suggests not letting new recruits swear their vows to the gods of their choice -- a clear break in the tradition of the Watch, and blatant xenophobia and religious intolerance.

I won't address the other parts of your post now because I fear that might lead to an overlong discussion. However, I will say that it does look like, by the time he reacts to the Pink Letter, on the surface that Jon is abusing his position as Lord Commander for personal gain. We the readers know better, though. He should have done a much better job of explaining himself; I can readily admit that.

Marsh is the kind of man who’d be the chief accountant at Belsen.

[kissdbyfire]

1 minute ago, SeanF said:

Marsh is the kind of man who’d be the chief accountant at Belsen.

He’d also be oh-so-dutiful if he’d been the accountant for ruling class of slavers in Slaver’s Bay… after all, the slavers were the ruling class, and any attempt at disrupting that would be a very bad thing in his book. 

[kissdbyfire]

13 minutes ago, Springwatch said:

He did not explain about the food.

By the time Jon strikes the deal w/ Tycho Nestoris he had already given up on Marsh. We don’t know whether he told Marsh about the loan, but he did tell him to get all of the ‘toll’ paid by the free folk to EbtS. Did Marsh ask him why? No idea, but I’d assume no b/c his bigotry blinds him, he shows no interest in things and is only minimally doing his duty. 
And even w/o this, to say ‘let them die’ when speaking of thousands of people b/c maybe we don’t have enough food so let’s just sit here and be safe is not really a great argument in defence of Marsh. 

[Nevets]

To be fair, I think that what precipitated the attack was Jon effectively declaring war on the Bolton, who, incidentally, are the local representative of the Crown (aka the government of Westeros).

Openly confronting the Crown representative with an army of wildlings at your back sounds like a recipe for serious trouble and conflict in the North.  And that's my opinion.  Gods only know what someone like Marsh might think.

I realize that neutrality is only a tradition, not a law, and that it can ultimately become merely an illusion.  But it's there for good reason; to keep them out of local conflicts and focused on their mission.  And while Ramsay is a depraved POS, I'm not convinced it's the Nights Watch's job to deal with him.

As I pointed out in my previous post Ramsay's depravity isn't why Jon is acting.  It's the unmeetable demands and the threats.  The depravity is a factor, but absent the threats, Jon would probably be on his way to Hardhome with nary a thought for Winterfell.

[Springwatch]

1 hour ago, Many-Faced Votary said:

Which instance are you referring to? Jon took a loan from the Iron Bank to purchase food from the south, on Bowen's advice, actually.

Ah. Quote?

[LongRider]

7 hours ago, Springwatch said:

Ah. Quote?

Found it!

Quote

A Dance with Dragons - Jon IV

The men will love that. "If we must. We'll cut each man's portion by a quarter." If my brothers are complaining of me now, what will they say when they're eating snow and acorn paste?
Dolorous Edd said, "Now I understand why King Stannis let the wildlings through the Wall. He means for us to eat them."
Jon had to smile. "It will not come to that."
"Oh, good," said Edd. "They look a stringy lot, and my teeth are not as sharp as when I was younger."
Jon had to smile. "It will not come to that."
"Oh, good," said Edd. "They look a stringy lot, and my teeth are not as sharp as when I was younger."
"If we had sufficient coin, we could buy food from the south and bring it in by ship," the Lord Steward said.

 

[Here's Looking At You, Kid]

Actually, there was no coordination to the stabbings.  The assassination was a desperate act to stop Jon from escalating the conflict with the Boltons.  Which was all Jon's fault because he sent Mance to get Arya. 

[kissdbyfire]

Just now, Here's Looking At You, Kid said:

Actually, there was no coordination to the stabbings.  The assassination was a desperate act to stop Jon from escalating the conflict with the Boltons.  Which was all Jon's fault because he sent Mance to get Arya. 

Making the rounds & spreading the usual hate, *how original!*

Yawn. 

[Craving Peaches]

5 hours ago, Here's Looking At You, Kid said:

Actually, there was no coordination to the stabbings.  The assassination was a desperate act to stop Jon from escalating the conflict with the Boltons.  Which was all Jon's fault because he sent Mance to get Arya. 

15+ people have already said this...

[Many-Faced Votary]

32 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

15+ people have already said this...

Try to understand: this person has 50 sock puppets, and wants to use all of them. 

[Quoth the raven,]

On 2/4/2023 at 10:49 PM, H Wadsworth Longfellow said:

Some talk farther down the forum are trashing the loyal steward of the Nights Watch, Bowen Marsh.  The attacks are not fair.  Marsh was not an ambitious man.  He was not looking for political advancement or personal material gain.  He and his Brothers assassinated Lord Commander Jon Snow because they had a duty to.  Jon Snow put them all in danger.  They needed to end his disastrous leadership before more damage is done. 

I found this very interesting debate on Reddit.  I like what the user Feldman had to say.

 

 

 

Jon's poor leadership and bad decisions past the halfway point of A Dance With Dragons is one of the most discussed topics.  Discussed and debated.  His fans would like for the criticisms to go away but they won't.  It is a very appropriate topic to discuss Jon's decisions as well as the reaction from Bowen Marsh.  Why did Bowen Marsh do it?  Because Jon had to be stopped. 

[Many-Faced Votary]

10 minutes ago, Quoth the raven, said:

Jon's poor leadership and bad decisions past the halfway point of A Dance With Dragons is one of the most discussed topics.  Discussed and debated.  His fans would like for the criticisms to go away but they won't.  It is a very appropriate topic to discuss Jon's decisions as well as the reaction from Bowen Marsh.  Why did Bowen Marsh do it?  Because Jon had to be stopped. 

Dany's poor leadership and bad decisions past the halfway point of A Dance With Dragons is one of the most discussed topics.  Discussed and debated.  Her fans would like for the criticisms to go away but they won't.  It is a very appropriate topic to discuss Dany's decisions as well as the reaction from the Harpy.  Why did the Harpy do it?  Because Dany had to be stopped.

[Craving Peaches]

4 hours ago, Quoth the raven, said:

Because Jon had to be stopped. 

Yes, the person who understood the real threat better than anyone and who was actively trying to save the whole of Westeros and the rest of the world just had to be stopped...I assume Daenerys actually wants people to rule over in Westeros, and not just a dead, frozen wasteland?

[Corvo the Crow]

10 hours ago, Quoth the raven, said:

Jon's poor leadership and bad decisions past the halfway point of A Dance With Dragons is one of the most discussed topics.  Discussed and debated.  His fans would like for the criticisms to go away but they won't.  It is a very appropriate topic to discuss Jon's decisions as well as the reaction from Bowen Marsh.  Why did Bowen Marsh do it?  Because Jon had to be stopped. 

Dude, Daenerys wiped out an entire city, killing directly or causing the deaths of likely over 100.000 people through outright murder in the streets, disease, famine and the number only grows. Unless you suggest in her great wistom she had them all die so they won't turn to wights come winter, Jon can never beat Daenerys at being a bad ruler. 

Someone has to kill her and fast before she does more of the Others work for them.

[Many-Faced Votary]

6 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Dude, Daenerys wiped out an entire city, killing directly or causing the deaths of likely over 100.000 people through outright murder in the streets, disease, famine and the number only grows. Unless you suggest in her great wistom she had them all die so they won't turn to wights come winter, Jon can never beat Daenerys at being a bad ruler. 

Someone has to kill her and fast before she does more of the Others work for them.

Do the fan fictions you two read have the same author?

[Corvo the Crow]

1 hour ago, Many-Faced Votary said:

Do the fan fictions you two read have the same author?

Lol? What fan fiction did you read that you think that Daenerys hasn't caused the deaths of tens of thousands already, whether through ordering her purchased slave soldiers to kill people or later abandoning them to famine and starvation? Please give a source so I can read it as well, it will certainly help me imagine Daenerys as a decent human being and not a bloodthirsty inbred abomination yelling out "dracarys" every time someone inconveniences her. 

Edited February 21 by Corvo the Crow