Honour and duty: “words are wind!”

[Lord of Raventree Hall]

On 9/29/2023 at 6:03 AM, kissdbyfire said:

We have lots of vows in the story: the NW vows, the KG vows, vows of fealty, etc etc etc.

Where do you draw the line? How far do you go until you say, "nope, that's a bit much". And that's not even getting into the issue of good old common sense.

I love the passage below and you can never have too much Jaime - from ASoS, Jaime VIII

Ser Meryn got a stubborn look on his face. "Are you telling us not to obey the king?"

"The king is eight. Our first duty is to protect him, which includes protecting him from himself. Use that ugly thing you keep inside your helm. If Tommen wants you to saddle his horse, obey him. If he tells you to kill his horse, come to me." 

 

What do these vows really mean? Especially, what do the vows mean if not backed up by matching actions? Absolutely nothing in my opinion. Sometimes a vow can be a coward's easy way out of doing the right thing. On the other hand, the lack of a vow of some sort does not mean that a person can't act honourably and do the right thing. 

Another interesting bit of trivia, this time not in the text, is Anne Groell, (one of) Martin's editor(s) saying she suggested removing some of the numerous "words are wind" and that Martin said, "no". 

Then we have knights who are utter arseholes, like Trant and Blount, and others that were dutiful knights keen on doing their duty but in doing so didn't act very honourably. 

AFfC, Jaime II 

The sight had filled him with disquiet, reminding him of Aerys Targaryen and the way a burning would arouse him. A king has no secrets from his Kingsguard. Relations between Aerys and his queen had been strained during the last years of his reign. They slept apart and did their best to avoid each other during the waking hours. But whenever Aerys gave a man to the flames, Queen Rhaella would have a visitor in the night. The day he burned his mace-and-dagger Hand, Jaime and Jon Darry had stood at guard outside her bedchamber whilst the king took his pleasure. "You're hurting me," they had heard Rhaella cry through the oaken door. "You're hurting me." In some queer way, that had been worse than Lord Chelsted's screaming. "We are sworn to protect her as well," Jaime had finally been driven to say. "We are," Darry allowed, "but not from him." 

Jaime had only seen Rhaella once after that, the morning of the day she left for Dragonstone. The queen had been cloaked and hooded as she climbed inside the royal wheelhouse that would take her down Aegon's High Hill to the waiting ship, but he heard her maids whispering after she was gone. They said the queen looked as if some beast had savaged her, clawing at her thighs and chewing on her breasts. A crowned beast, Jaime knew.

Darry did his duty, but did he act honourably?

Let’s compare Darry to Dunk.

THK

The Hedge Knight 

One man-at-arms was dangling the puppets of Florian and Jonquil from his hands as another set them afire with a torch. Three more men were opening chests, spilling more puppets on the ground and stamping on them. The dragon puppet was scattered all about them, a broken wing here, its head there, its tail in three pieces. And in the midst of it all stood Prince Aerion, resplendent in a red velvet doublet with long dagged sleeves, twisting Tanselle's arm in both hands. She was on her knees, pleading with him. Aerion ignored her. He forced open her hand and seized one of her fingers. Dunk stood there stupidly, not quite believing what he saw. Then he heard a crack, and Tanselle screamed. 

One of Aerion's men tried to grab him, and went flying. Three long strides, then Dunk grabbed the prince's shoulder and wrenched him around hard. His sword and dagger were forgotten, along with everything the old man had ever taught him. His fist knocked Aerion off his feet, and the toe of his boot slammed into the prince's belly. When Aerion went for his knife, Dunk stepped on his wrist and then kicked him again, right in the mouth. He might have kicked him to death right then and there, but the princeling's men swarmed over him. He had a man on each arm and another pounding him across the back. No sooner had he wrestled free of one than two more were on him.

 

Now that's honourable. Dunk defends Tanselle against Prince Aerion. He risks his life because it was the right thing, and the honourable thing to do. 

Similarly, Brienne takes after her ancestor. 

AFfC, Brienne VII

“Brienne sucked in her breath and drew Oathkeeper. Too many, she thought, with a start of fear, they are too many. “Gendry,” she said in a low voice, “you’ll want a sword, and armor. These are not your friends. They’re no one’s friends.”

“What are you talking about?” The boy came and stood beside her, his hammer in his hand.

Lightning cracked to the south as the riders swung down off their horses. For half a heartbeat darkness turned to day. An axe gleamed silvery blue, light shimmered off mail and plate, and beneath the dark hood of the lead rider Brienne glimpsed an iron snout and rows of steel teeth, snarling.

Gendry saw it too. “Him.”

“Not him. His helm.” Brienne tried to keep the fear from her voice, but her mouth was dry as dust. She had a pretty good notion who wore the Hound’s helm. The children, she thought.”

“The door to the inn banged open. Willow stepped out into the rain, a crossbow in her hands. The girl was shouting at the riders, but a clap of thunder rolled across the yard, drowning out her words. As it faded, Brienne heard the man in the Hound’s helm say, “Loose a quarrel at me and I’ll shove that crossbow up your cunt and fuck you with it. Then I’ll pop your fucking eyes out and make you eat them.” The fury in the man’s voice drove Willow back a step, trembling.

Seven, Brienne thought again, despairing. She had no chance against seven, she knew. No chance, and no choice.

She stepped out into the rain, Oathkeeper in hand. “Leave her be. If you want to rape someone, try me.”

Isn't it interesting that the two truest knights we have in the story didn’t swear any knightly vows? 

Words are wind indeed. 
 

And this also connects to the NW, the Wall, and the vows the black brothers take. The Wall won't fail because of anything Jon did or didn't do, it won't fail because there are too few "proper" nightswatchmen who have said the "proper" vows. It's just the opposite. The Wall will fail - and I don't necessarily mean fall - because of the decisions of the proper crows, who have sworn their proper vows. Because none of that matters, what matters is doing the right thing - not the easy or dutiful thing - at the right time.
What matters is doing the honourable thing, even if it goes against one’s duty. 

TLDR; As the excellent Ms. Maddow says, “watch what they do, not what they say”. 

@kissdbyfire : Jaime Lannister, is that you? 

Joking aside, I liked your takes here. I know this is onlyl loosely related, but I grew up religious, and they kind of make you swear a lot of "vows" in religions. I often found them confusing, and I found the enforcement of them often made me unhappy for no reason. Ironically, in some cases, I kind of agree with the sentiment behind the "vow" in adulthood, but because they didn't actually..try to teach me how to live those rules in my everyday life, I had to...break the vows a bunch in order to actually see the value of them. The one that jumps out to me the most is alcohol. Drinking iin moderation I think is a really good idea...but instead of teaching me that, religion banned alcohol, made me feel absurdly for wanting to try a substance that ....a lot of people like. My partner grew up non-religious, and has always drank with moderation because her mom taught her what it meant and why she should drink in moderation instead of just forcing her to swear some random vow. 

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

57 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

The idea that Gregor is the only rotten knight is what is truly insane.

As is the idea that all knights are rotten because Gregor is rotten, which is what Sandor subscribes to.

[kissdbyfire]

4 minutes ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

As is the idea that all knights are rotten because Gregor is rotten, which is what Sandor subscribes to.

Only I never said all knights are rotten, I said the majority are. Which is true by the way. 

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, BalerionTheCat said:

Really? I find you optimistic. Is Old Nan stories only wind?

The Others can break the Wall, but they won't break society. They will stabilize it since people will want a savior to, well, save them. And he or she or they will be (a) living god(s) among the mortals.

48 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

The idea that Gregor is the only rotten knight is what is truly insane. It’s most certainly not one corrupt MP or congressperson among hundreds of honest ones. It’s probably worse than the current House of Commons or MAGA held House of Representatives. 

LOL, who made that claim? I said that Sandor's silly 'worldview' is based on a single example - his shithead brother getting away with his many crimes and becoming a knight.

Most knights in this world are not scum of the type of Gregor Clegane. Especially not most knights who actually hold lands and titles of their own, making them powerful men in their own right. They do not caper to the whims of lords or kings, they live in their keeps, exploit their peasants, and ride in tourneys. They are not Kingsguard or household knights who have to caper to the whims of their lords or kings because they pay and clothe and feed them. They have the freedom that comes with being a nobleman with actual lands. And if their liege lord is madman or a monster then they are actually free to ignore his summons if some other people attack him.

Lorch and Clegane commit atrocities because they enjoy doing this. It is what makes them get off. But that is a rather rare type of men.

Most knights are just normal people. They would have average skill and an average character. They would be like Kyle the Cat, Robar Royce, Wendel Manderly, Bonifer Hasty, Jon Fossoway, etc.

Also, of course, your modernist takes on things just makes no sense. KG and household knights and sworn swords are in no position to make policy or decide policy, especially not in a potential regicide context. They are raised and trained to obey their betters because that is their purpose. A king in this world has a Kingsguard to have deeply loyal men who obey him without question. He also has household knights and sworn swords to be able to enforce his will.

This society wouldn't be a feudal society with a king running things if the societal framework were granting the average KG or sworn sword the right to think for themselves. They are not their own men, they are beholden to somebody else - and they entered such a contract willingly. They are not forced into it. Nobody is forced to join the king's household nor forced to swear a KG vow.

Like Barristan they can later wonder whether they made the right decision then and there ... but the rules of the society they live doesn't allow them to act as if a king or even their lord was their equal, that they had the right to judge them. This is a hierarchical society. There are masters and their are servants - and knights like the KG are, in the end, servants.

The lords and landed knights to partake in the power of the king to a point. They own swords and spears, they can raise armies and command them. They have power. But a knight without lands or levies lacks any such power. And that's why they have to do as they are told.

If they do not, they suffer. And if they turn against the societal order - say, by killing the king or their lord - they end up dead.

[kissdbyfire]

40 minutes ago, Lord of Raventree Hall said:

@kissdbyfire : Jaime Lannister, is that you? 

Joking aside, I liked your takes here. I know this is onlyl loosely related, but I grew up religious, and they kind of make you swear a lot of "vows" in religions. I often found them confusing, and I found the enforcement of them often made me unhappy for no reason. Ironically, in some cases, I kind of agree with the sentiment behind the "vow" in adulthood, but because they didn't actually..try to teach me how to live those rules in my everyday life, I had to...break the vows a bunch in order to actually see the value of them. The one that jumps out to me the most is alcohol. Drinking iin moderation I think is a really good idea...but instead of teaching me that, religion banned alcohol, made me feel absurdly for wanting to try a substance that ....a lot of people like. My partner grew up non-religious, and has always drank with moderation because her mom taught her what it meant and why she should drink in moderation instead of just forcing her to swear some random vow. 

I love this, and I don’t really think it’s that loosely related. As I said in a previous reply, the point I was trying to make wasn’t exclusively about vows and oaths, though these do come into it as well. But it’s much broader than that. It’s really about basic right and wrong, and how sometimes rules and vows and yes, sins, may keep someone from doing the right thing while also giving them an excuse: “it’s against the rules”; “I swore an oath!”; “its a sin!”. I have no respect for someone who does something they know is wrong and then uses excuses like these to not only justify their actions but also to grandstand and look down on others.

[Craving Peaches]

I think in the books there is a sort of 'letter of the law vs spirit of the law' thing going on. Common sense should prevail. Like with the Aerys issue.

[BalerionTheCat]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

The Others can break the Wall, but they won't break society. They will stabilize it since people will want a savior to, well, save them. And he or she or they will be (a) living god(s) among the mortals.

I'm counting on that. If the saviors belong to the old system, Barrisan, Stannis, Randyll Tarly, Victarion and such, even Dany, the shit will continue unabated.

If the saviors are Bran, Jon, the Free Folk, ... they could rebuild or change the system. But whoever wants to change the system must be a true living god. Or better, (an) undying one(s), weirwood Bran, undead Jon. Otherwise, the old sins will return and the summer (or spring) will be short.

2 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

Only I never said all knights are rotten, I said the majority are. Which is true by the way. 

Quite a lot are documented scum, such as Clayton Suggs. And not many that Jame had praise for. How many did Tywin dirty work in the Riverlands? While other where hiding in their castles. Or did and said nothing, only kissing Tywin's butt afterward?

[kissdbyfire]

1 hour ago, Craving Peaches said:

I think in the books there is a sort of 'letter of the law vs spirit of the law' thing going on. Common sense should prevail. Like with the Aerys issue.

I think so too. And there are probably things that aren’t even the written law, more like customs and traditions. And this is something that we also see in the NW.

1 hour ago, BalerionTheCat said:

I'm counting on that. If the saviors belong to the old system, Barrisan, Stannis, Randyll Tarly, Victarion and such, even Dany, the shit will continue unabated.

Agree, except for Dany.

1 hour ago, BalerionTheCat said:

If the saviors are Bran, Jon, the Free Folk, ... they could rebuild or change the system. But whoever wants to change the system must be a true living god. Or better, (an) undying one(s), weirwood Bran, undead Jon. Otherwise, the old sins will return and the summer (or spring) will be short.

UnJon and Tree Bran are not in my list of predictions but I agree w/ the general idea. 

1 hour ago, BalerionTheCat said:

Quite a lot are documented scum, such as Clayton Suggs. And not many that Jame had praise for. How many did Tywin dirty work in the Riverlands? While other were hiding in their castles. Or did and said nothing, only kissing Tywin's butt afterward?

Ugh Sluggs is awful. But even the KG, the best ones are only seen that way b/c the others are so vile… like Blount, .Trant, et al.

[BalerionTheCat]

1 hour ago, kissdbyfire said:

UnJon and Tree Bran are not in my list of predictions but I agree w/ the general idea. 

Bran will have a very short life otherwise. There will be a price to pay. And it will need time to change men. To forever forget the old time. Hundreds, maybe thousands of years before Bran and Jon can let go. Or when they leave, hell will return. So they must stay as long as possible.

[kissdbyfire]

19 minutes ago, BalerionTheCat said:

Bran will have a very short life otherwise.

What makes you think that? 

19 minutes ago, BalerionTheCat said:

There will be a price to pay.
 

There’s always a price to be paid, right?

19 minutes ago, BalerionTheCat said:

And it will need time to change men. To forever forget the old time. Hundreds, maybe thousands of years before Bran and Jon can let go. Or when they leave, hell will return. So they must stay as long as possible.

I think maybe you have even less faith in humanity than I do, not an easy thing. 
But yes, it will take time to change the culture significantly until Westeros becomes a slightly less unfair place. That said, I don’t think Jon and Bran are the only ones who can affect change.

[Craving Peaches]

18 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

I think in the books there is a sort of 'letter of the law vs spirit of the law' thing going on. Common sense should prevail. Like with the Aerys issue.

@kissdbyfire I don't know if you are interested but I expanded on this point a little here: 

[BalerionTheCat]

22 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

What makes you think that? 

The chosen ones are not robust, and their quick years upon the earth are few, for every song must have its balance. But once inside the wood they linger long indeed. A thousand eyes, a hundred skins, wisdom deep as the roots of ancient trees. Greenseers.

OK Bloodraven lived long, before becoming a Greenseer. But I don't think he developed his powers so young, so strongly. Bran is already a greenseer, I would say his body is even too young and frail to handle so much power, the charge too much for flesh. More so, he is severely disabled, broken.

22 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

I think maybe you have even less faith in humanity than I do, not an easy thing. 

In GRRM world, yes I have 0 faith in humanity. Of course, there are people with good intent. Jon, Dany, Sam, Davos... even Ned. But they are unable to deal with those around them. And even if they achieve peace and prosperity, at a great cost, 1 or 2 generations later, a weak, stupid or mean king will ruin everything. An ambitious lord or brother will seek the opportunity to seize power. He will find scums and discontents, Gregors, Rossarts, Trants, Kettleblack, Freys and men even lower, to partake in the power. The problem is not the few evil men who top the system. It is the multitude of petty men, ready to murder their neighbours for a crumb of power.

According to legends, the God-on-Earth kept the Great Empire of the Dawn in check. How? We don't know. But after him, the empire failed and went into chaos. I feel only supernatural powers, god-like powers, not driven by human ambitions and wantings, are necessary to keep humanity in check. The Others are the stick to keep bad men in check. Like unruly, immature children.

I'm wondering if our own world is better anchored in goodness. If power is better barred to the wrong men...

[kissdbyfire]

On 10/2/2023 at 4:38 PM, BalerionTheCat said:

The chosen ones are not robust, and their quick years upon the earth are few, for every song must have its balance. But once inside the wood they linger long indeed. A thousand eyes, a hundred skins, wisdom deep as the roots of ancient trees. Greenseers.

OK Bloodraven lived long, before becoming a Greenseer. But I don't think he developed his powers so young, so strongly. Bran is already a greenseer, I would say his body is even too young and frail to handle so much power, the charge too much for flesh. More so, he is severely disabled, broken.

Sorry, I completely missed your reply. 
 

Yeah, I see this greenseeing and being married to the trees very differently. For starters, I don’t think we can say Bloodraven became a greenseer later in life. As he himself tells Bran, “your blood makes you a greenseer”. It’s who Bran is, he was born a greenseer, and I think the same goes for Bloodraven. He may have awakened his greenseeing gifts later on, but that doesn’t mean he wasn’t one at birth. In fact, I think there’s evidence that he was already one while in KL. 
 

As to being wedded to the trees, I don’t think being physically connected to the trees is necessary at all. It was necessary in Bloodraven’s case b/c he had to extend his lifespan beyond that of a normal person, but not to become a greenseer. 
 

ADwD, Bran III

“Most of him has gone into the tree," explained the singer Meera called Leaf. "He has lived beyond his mortal span, and yet he lingers. For us, for you, for the realms of men. Only a little strength remains in his flesh. He has a thousand eyes and one, but there is much to watch. One day you will know."

 

On 10/2/2023 at 4:38 PM, BalerionTheCat said:

In GRRM world, yes I have 0 faith in humanity. Of course, there are people with good intent. Jon, Dany, Sam, Davos... even Ned. But they are unable to deal with those around them. And even if they achieve peace and prosperity, at a great cost, 1 or 2 generations later, a weak, stupid or mean king will ruin everything. An ambitious lord or brother will seek the opportunity to seize power. He will find scums and discontents, Gregors, Rossarts, Trants, Kettleblack, Freys and men even lower, to partake in the power. The problem is not the few evil men who top the system. It is the multitude of petty men, ready to murder their neighbours for a crumb of power.

 

I’m afraid the bold is even more true in real life than in Martin’s world. 

 

On 10/2/2023 at 4:38 PM, BalerionTheCat said:

According to legends, the God-on-Earth kept the Great Empire of the Dawn in check. How? We don't know. But after him, the empire failed and went into chaos. I feel only supernatural powers, god-like powers, not driven by human ambitions and wantings, are necessary to keep humanity in check. The Others are the stick to keep bad men in check. Like unruly, immature children.

I'm wondering if our own world is better anchored in goodness. If power is better barred to the wrong men...

Well, in my not at all optimistic opinion the answer is “NO”.

[SeanF]

On 10/1/2023 at 4:46 PM, Lord Varys said:

Jaime never rebelled indeed. And he never actually 'killed the king' even if he did ... he killed a guy who was dead meat already, a man who had lost his war and his crown already. Jaime failed at the most crucial test of a KG most spectacularly. The litmus test is if you stay true to the king when all the odds are against him. Betraying him then is quite easy, especially if your dad's troops are outside and want to kill the king.

Jaime actually killing Aerys - or trying to kill him - for the benefit of some poor fellow who was burned alive. Or perhaps even for the benefit of the cowardly queen who apparently never tried to help Rhaegar to depose the guy nor ever made any such attempts herself. That would have been brave. But gleefully murdering a guy who is actually about to die just so you can enjoy the deed yourself is the action of an asshole. Which is what Jaime is.

I don't see that. He does exactly the same thing as knightly thugs without pretending to be an honorable guy. But guess what - not all knights are thugs, not even all of the knights in Joffrey's employ. This 'system' is not rotten all that much. Of course monarchy as such is a rotten form of government, but there is no alternative to it in that world that we know of.

The idea that Gregor being able to be a knight proves somehow 'the chivalry system is rotten' is like saying one case of corruption in a parliamentary democracy means democracy doesn't work. I get why Sandor is hating the notion of Gregor being a knight ... but his conclusion there is utter nonsense. As is his silly assumption that all lords must be like Tywin.

The truth is - most knights are not thugs like Gregor. But they are, of course, instruments of war and part of the ruling class, and not champions of the innocents or other such nonsense.

Also - Sandor is actually worse than a guy who pretends to be a nice guy but does some thuggery when asked to. His mind and actions are all about being cruel in word and deed. That sets a very bad example and influences his environment in a bad way.

And again - Barristan Selmy is a great man. Saving Aerys from Duskendale was a great feat and saved lives back then. The guy could not know what would happen after. And guarding a king who loses his mind is tough ... but Barristan watched atrocities the king and his government and his court committed and approved of. It was never his place or job or duty to overthrow the king he had sworn to protect. And it is actually quite silly to pretend he could have done that.

Anyone actually killing Aerys before the moment when the cowardly Lannister murdered him would have died a very painful, very ugly death for it. Is that the duty of a knight, to break his KG vows to murder a king so some people who might be innocent - or not - might live? I see no reason why Barristan should die so Brandon and Rickard Stark or this or that pompous nobleman who bit the dust under Aerys II could live.

Even within the constraints of this world, there may be circumstances in which a sworn sword/retainer/household knight may be expected to disobey orders.

For example, I think the Red Wedding is such a gross violation of religious norms as to damn anyone who participated, however lowly.

[BalerionTheCat]

On 10/4/2023 at 10:34 PM, kissdbyfire said:

Yeah, I see this greenseeing and being married to the trees very differently.

I don't think we have the argument to exclude an hypothesis, if one wants to stick to it. Possibly Bran will have as much power without being joined with the trees. But given that BR and Leaf seemed in a hurry to grow Weirwood seeds inside him, I would rather believe the joining is necessary. Also, given that GRRM introduced this concept of very long life: the God-on-Earth, his sons and heirs, other mythical heroes, the bunch of CotF greenseers still living in the cave, this same potentiality given to Bran (and by a different method for Jon). Given also the fact that in most (or all) GRRM documented histories, chaos and wars always returned after 1 or 2 generations of peace. I feel the need of a (near) immortal "stewardship" to sustain same a duration peace. And thus for Bran to follow the path of the cave's other greenseers as the only choice. And for Jon to remain "undying", whatever "alive" he may still look.

Edited October 5, 2023 by BalerionTheCat

[Sandy Clegg]

On 10/5/2023 at 11:02 PM, BalerionTheCat said:

And for Jon to remain "undying", whatever "alive" he may still look.

I’m excited for an undead Jon storyline, it feels like the natural next step for his arc. He’s spent time with the wildlings and seen their ‘human side’. Maybe something similar will happen with the Others.