[ADwD Spoilers] Jon and Dany character devolution

[Jonias Snow]

Just finished the last Jon chapter of ADwD, I still cannot fathom why Bowen would do something like that, he is wise enough and thinks fairly logically concerning situations. I mean doesn't he realize they are all dead men, they attempted an assasination in front of Jon supporters, queens men, etc. the Wildlings have come to respect Jon and they don't take well to backstabbers, you must challenge and fight each other, test of strength. This makes no sense, it's like GRRM threw something in w/o thinking it through.

We all know if they try to arrest Jon for betraying the vows, the Queen will laugh at them (throw them in jail more like) and the wildlings won't put up with it either. This is what bothers me, it's almost sloppy work, on the part of Bowen, and I don't see him as sloppy.

The reason I say attempted, is Jon's clothing is layered, coat, leather doublet, etc., I don't think two dagger stabs in the stomach will penetrate very far in. The stab in the back (wonder who it was?) is the bad wound, but then again, with all that layer of clothing to get thru.

We all know Ms. Red will heal Jon, cheezit, she is the penultimate Red Priestess, if Thoros, a small fry can raise Beric multiple times, we know Mel's power extinquishes his.

[The Human Abstract]

No - Jon was a complete fool. The only reason he has to even worry about the Boltons is because he decided to take part in the politics of the realm.

1) He not only tells Stannis where he can get more men he tells Stannis where he should attack (Deepwood Motte).

2) He imprisons Karstarks and then marries the Karstark girl to Thenns so that they can gain control of Karhold.

3) Instead of using a living Mance to help gather up and lead wildlings he has him and some spearwives infiltrate Winterfell to steal back his sister.

4) He sends word to Stannis that the Karstarks are planning to betray him - and uses Night's Watch to do so.

5) The final straw, in front of all his men that he is supposed to be leading, he says he is going to break his vows and deal with Ramsay.

If Jon had just worried about manning The Wall instead of trying to influence the events of The North maybe his brothers wouldn't have wanted him dead. They may not have liked his treatment of the wildlings but at least that way he wouldn't be making enemies south of The Wall as well. In regards to Melisandre - she wasn't correct in intrepreting her visions - but Jon is an utter idiot to not see that there was a lot of truth in her visions. I mean, he is acting on the letter of Ramsay which has just as much truth in it as Melisandre's visions. However, for some reason he completely disregards her and is willing to break his vows and go fight the Boltons. IMO - it would be fitting if Jon just stayed dead.

Honestly, I don't think the brothers betray him because of his moderate involvement in Westeros politics. I think these things are reasons that YOU are mad at him. I don't even think his brothers know all the details. It almost sounds like are angry because you think his conduct his morally or ethically inappropriate for someone who has made the watch's vows.

It's easy to Monday morning quarterback the Melisandre thing, but the author is clearly trying very hard to demonstrate in Jon's perspective why he doesn't heed her. Again and again he does it. I don't think Martin is telling us "this character is an idiot". He's telling "because of previous embarassing gaffe's, he no longer pays much attention to Melisander".

[The Human Abstract]

Anyone who thinks Jon was bad leader read a different book than the one I read.

He had the most progressive and moral vision of any of the kings and queens that I've seen in the series so far. While Dany was floundering in Meereen, Jon was flourishing at the Wall by adapting to the changing times. The old institutions of the Nights Watch were doomed, which Jon saw and acted on. Unlike the other leaders of the Nights Watch like Bowen Marsh who couldn't see past their racist sensibilities, Jon knew that the "realms of men" could be defined to include the Wildings so he brought the Wildings south of the Wall.

This accomplished many things. First, it reduced the supply of wights that were available for the Others. It also gave the Watch more battle tested and hardy men that could be used to garrison most of the forts. Unlike Jon's predecessors who saw the many keeps of the Nights Watch fall into ruin, Jon saw them rebuilt and fortified. Then he used marriages to integrate them into Westeros society. And with the logistical problem of extra mouths to feed, Jon borrowed money from the Iron Bank of Bravos and forced the Wildings to give much of their wealth as well.

Jon's men killed him for this, that's true. But that's not Jon's fault. That's the fault of Bowen Marsh and everyone else who lacked the moral and political vision to see that Jon was acting in their best interests of the Watch and in the best interests of the realms of men. The irony is that when Bowen Marsh and his conspirators put their knives in Jon's back and called out, "For the Watch," they killed the one man who truly stood for the Watch, especially in the changing realities of the world that they lived in.

Agreed.

[Ser Pistus]

Take Jon's final chapter out, 90% of Dany's chapters, and give the situation at Winterfell a conclusion and this would have been a damn good book

Just so.

[Buried Treasure]

I just re-read Jon's last chapter. His misinterpretation of Ghost's anxiety is actually quite understandable. He goes to his rooms to find Fulk and Mully standing outside as Ghost is pacing inside. Then Ghost snarls at Jon himself, and sniffs around Bowen and Yarwyk when they come in. It's not exactly as clear cut as Ghost being perfectly calm then trying to attack Bowen when he appears (and we don't even know if Yarwyk was in on the betrayal). Earlier on in the book we are told that the Rangers are generally more supportive of opening forts with wildling than the Stewards and Builders - but Jon can't send away everyone who disapproves of his vision for the watch. He did act to remove the most obvious threats. Slynt was to have commanded one of the first forts to have opened on the basis that: 1. he needed to be sent away 2. to have risen to command the Gold Cloaks he must actually have been a compotent officer.

Jon's decision to ride south I do find somewhat out of character. At first I thought it was him not thinking clearly, due to a combination of recieving the letter and Ghost's uneasiness transmitting. But he then spends two hours planning with Tormund. So I guess the main motivation is preventing 'Arya' falling back into the hands of this monster whom Jon just found out flayed six spearwives.

[Raksha the Demon]

Anyone who thinks Jon was bad leader read a different book than the one I read.

He had the most progressive and moral vision of any of the kings and queens that I've seen in the series so far. While Dany was floundering in Meereen, Jon was flourishing at the Wall by adapting to the changing times. The old institutions of the Nights Watch were doomed, which Jon saw and acted on. Unlike the other leaders of the Nights Watch like Bowen Marsh who couldn't see past their racist sensibilities, Jon knew that the "realms of men" could be defined to include the Wildings so he brought the Wildings south of the Wall.

This accomplished many things. First, it reduced the supply of wights that were available for the Others. It also gave the Watch more battle tested and hardy men that could be used to garrison most of the forts. Unlike Jon's predecessors who saw the many keeps of the Nights Watch fall into ruin, Jon saw them rebuilt and fortified. Then he used marriages to integrate them into Westeros society. And with the logistical problem of extra mouths to feed, Jon borrowed money from the Iron Bank of Bravos and forced the Wildings to give much of their wealth as well.

Jon's men killed him for this, that's true. But that's not Jon's fault. That's the fault of Bowen Marsh and everyone else who lacked the moral and political vision to see that Jon was acting in their best interests of the Watch and in the best interests of the realms of men. The irony is that when Bowen Marsh and his conspirators put their knives in Jon's back and called out, "For the Watch," they killed the one man who truly stood for the Watch, especially in the changing realities of the world that they lived in.

I do think that Jon was right to try to bring the Wildlings into the Night's Watch; he desperately needed more Crows as Winter, and the Others, advanced; and bringing the Wildlings into the fold as allies and potential recruits lessened the number of foes and added to the number of cannon fodder swords. Jon should have kept Ghost by him, though...Hopefully Bowen Marsh and the other assassins will soon hang.

[Direwolf_Warg]

But if your intepretation is truly accurate, then Jon shouldn't have any trouble asking the Night's Watch to take part.

The reason he didn't is because he BELIEVED that what he was about to do was breaking oath and he wanted to take that responsibility himself without involving others.

He is a Night's Watch man as well. What applies to him applies to the Watch. If he felt his decision to march south was justified and within the Night's Watch vows, he could have ordered the Watch to go with him. Instead, he made it personal and had volunteers mostly from the wildlings who had sworn NO OATH.

So that argument doesn't fly with me.

Also from the internal monologue it's CLEAR that now he is finally making the decision to break oath. Why? For his sister Arya. He stayed after his father was murdered and dishonored for his vows, he stayed while Robb was betrayed and murdered for his vows, he stayed while Theon murdered Bran and Rickon for his vows, he stayed while Sansa disappeared and died for all he knew for his vows, he stayed when his only living kin was kidnapped and forced to marry a bloody sociopath for his vows. Now at the end, he simply can't endure anymore.

It is CLEAR that he is marching south for Arya and to fact Ramsay and that this is personal. I just have a very hard time understanding any other explanation of his actions that frames around it benefiting the Night's Watch for instance.

As for meeting your enemy on a field of your choosing, well hell's fucking bells, you meet him AFTER making him march through a blizzard cold enough to wipe out most armies on this earth. People were eating their horses AND EACH OTHER just taking that little scenic jaunt from Deepwood Motte to Winterfell. What do you think is going to happen to ANY army that has to go from Winterfell to the Wall? The threat in that letter is idiotic to begin with and Jon is a moron for believing it in the first place.

Fine, let them march. You can defend the Wall from Mole's town. By the time those 85 half starved soldiers stagger in from the blizzard, the women and kids and cripples can take care of them . . .

It would be the utter depths of stupidity to take any army and march to Winterfell to do . . . what exactly?

Again, sheer idiocy and a very very clumsy plot device along with the boar to get Jon killed. Hell might as well just have him trip and fall from the Wall it would have been as subtle.

Jon wasn't taking an Army. Jon was considering going alone, and ended up accepting the help of Soren Shieldbreaker, the Wanderer, Torreg the Tall, Brogg, Harle the Huntsman, Harle the Handsome, Ygon Oldfather, Blind Doss, and the Great Walrus. 9 men, plus Jon. He has no intentions of raising an Army. The logistics are a bit different.

From what we know, Jon's plan and the fact he would have gone alone if no one had volunteered strongly implies he wasn't intending to march force on force. It's a mission of subterfuge.

Also, it isn't clear that he wanted to march for Arya. In fact, Bolton highlights the fact he doesn't have her and wants her returned often and well in his letter. It makes no sense that he would accept the letter as true enough to take action, and convieniently forget that the man writing it doesn't have the person you would take action for.

[Blue Steel]

It is CLEAR that he is marching south for Arya and to fact Ramsay and that this is personal. I just have a very hard time understanding any other explanation of his actions that frames around it benefiting the Night's Watch for instance.

That doesn't make any sense. How is Jon marching south for Arya when he knows that Ramsay doesn't have Arya?

And your other argument about Jon breaking his oath simply because he believed he was relies on a faulty premise. Just because Jon didn't ask his brothers to participate doesn't mean he belives it is oathbreaking. Instead, read what Jon actually thought. According to Jon's thoughts, "If this is oathbreaking, the crime is mine and mine alone." So Jon clearly doesn't know it is oathbreaking. It might be, but he's not sure and he wants to protect his brothers in case it is.

[Volderon]

Or maybe Jon becomes the Great Other because of that blue flower growing in the wall. At this point in the series, anything is possible if it moves the plot along as we've seen with GRRM killing Jon.

[Blue Winter Rose]

He was also going somewhere he felt was not particularly dangerous with people he trusted. It's also likely to me that his betrayers were merely waiting for a time when Ghost wasn't with him.

About this, couldn't they wait for a moment when Jon was completely alone to do this. They did it all right in front of everyone for the world to see their betrayal. If they had done it secretly then they could have blamed it on one of the wildlings who it is clear they despised.

Why do it right then and there, were they afraid this was their last chance to kill him? If they wanted him dead why didn't they just let him go on his mission and hope he never comes back.

[Volderon]

About this, couldn't they wait for a moment when Jon was completely alone to do this. They did it all right in front of everyone for the world to see their betrayal. If they had done it secretly then they could have blamed it on one of the wildlings who it is clear they despised.

Why do it right then and there, were they afraid this was their last chance to kill him? If they wanted him dead why didn't they just let him go on his mission and hope he never comes back.

Because George wanted to leave it on a cliffhanger for 18 years.

[Blue Steel]

.

Hrm... the vision of the blue rose growing out a chink in a wall of ice -> Jon preserved in one of the cells in the Wall until he can be restored to life? I'm kind of imagining this to be a late-novel thing for TWoW, but who knows.

Remember Aemon's words to Sam, "Fire consumes, and cold preserves." And he even mentioned Jon in that exchange.

[sn0mm1s]

Honestly, I don't think the brothers betray him because of his moderate involvement in Westeros politics. I think these things are reasons that YOU are mad at him. I don't even think his brothers know all the details. It almost sounds like are angry because you think his conduct his morally or ethically inappropriate for someone who has made the watch's vows.

It's easy to Monday morning quarterback the Melisandre thing, but the author is clearly trying very hard to demonstrate in Jon's perspective why he doesn't heed her. Again and again he does it. I don't think Martin is telling us "this character is an idiot". He's telling "because of previous embarassing gaffe's, he no longer pays much attention to Melisander".

It wasn't moderate involvement. Kidnapping, imprisonment, planning attacks, and the final straw would be a full scale attack hardly constitutes moderate involvement. I am not mad at Jon - he was just dumb. He is unable to separate himself from Westeros. I don't find that a redeeming quality for someone who took the Night's Watch oath willingly. Jon's actions puts the Night's Watch in peril.

[sn0mm1s]

Both the Lannisters and Boltons were planning on taking care of Jon Snow irrespective of whether he gave the finger to Stannis or not. And if he told Stannis to take a leap, Stannis would have likely seized the Wall and placed Jon's head on a spike so he could have a more cooperative LC.

And Jon is not an idiot, seems tactically astute, and we can probably assume he was aware of the likelihood of all of the foregoing. All said, Jon played his hand well but was beat by a wild card.

Can you point out where the Boltons stated they were going to take care of Jon? Cersei wanted Jon dead but no one else cared and Cersei is no longer in power. Regardless, Jon doesn't know any of that and is still bound and determined to plot against the enemies of the Starks and Winterfell.

He also isn't tactically astute because everyone on The Wall knows it is not defensible from the south. In other words, that is the incentive to not take part in the politics of the realm.

[Ran]

You know, someone (was that you?) brought that line up recently, and also how Maester Aemon mentions that he should never have left the Wall. I'm starting to think there's something to it.

Re: how many wildlings were going with Jon,

To be fair, it seemed clear it wasn't just those nine. Those heroes and chieftains would surely lead other wildlings to join him. I believe there were as many as a thousand wildling warriors who came south with Tormund, so I expect a large proportion of those would be joining the expedition south.

[pera]

I am quite convinced that GRRM has decided (probably at the beginning of XXI century) to capitalize success of the first three installments of the ASOIAF and transform the entire series into a soap opera. If you look more carefully, AFFC and ADWD are more TV screenplays than anything else. From that perspective, ADWD brings a brand new HBO-Jon and HBO-Daenerys (aka Sookie Stakehouse) and faithfully portrays them according to the soap opera character matrix. As a novel, ADWD is a monumental failure and probably the worst piece of the epic fantasy genre. On the other hand, it is a perfect soap opera screenplay with mildly idiotic characters (as befits this genre). Hence, devolution of Jon to HBO-Jon and Deny to HBO-Deny is both logical and necessary.

The question is what to do? Personally, I would really like to throw a nice little rotten tomato on GRRM's head just to show him my appreciation of his latest work. Bah, it's not going to happen anyway, so I'll just continue to rant on forums and try to went my frustration.

[Steve Moss]

But if your intepretation is truly accurate, then Jon shouldn't have any trouble asking the Night's Watch to take part.

Jon can't deliver the hostages demanded. So if Jon does nothing, and remains passive, Ramsay Bolton will destroy the NW. The only answer which results in the survival of the NW is action.

If Jon goes south and fights the Bolton/Freys with the NW in tow, one of two things happens. He and the NW win, in which case there is no short term consequence to the NW but long term their recruits from the other Seven Kingdoms will dry up as they are no longer a neutral dumping ground but will be percieved as a Stark partisan organization.

Alternatively, he and the NW lose. In which case the NW ceases to exist, both short and long term.

By going alone, Jon secures the NW as a viable organization long term. If he wins, its on record that the only NW [potential] oathbreaker is Jon Snow, the balance of the institution is sound. If he loses, its on record that the only NW oathbreaker is Jon Snow, the balance of the institution is sound.

By acting, Jon was potentially saving the NW. By moving against the Boltons, he was acting in the interests of the NW as otherwise Ramsay would have destroyed it. By leaving his sworn brothers out of it, Jon Snow was acting in the interests of the NW in the event his action failed. No matter how one looks at it, Jon made the right decision.

I think Jon won't necessarily see it that way, but doubtless circumstances will force him to accept it. I think the Watch certainly will have nothing more to do with him.

I suspect that while everyone may view him as the ex-LC of the NW, Jon himself will take his vows far more seriously and will act to protect the "realms of men", which is what one would expect from AA.

The reason I say attempted, is Jon's clothing is layered, coat, leather doublet, etc., I don't think two dagger stabs in the stomach will penetrate very far in. The stab in the back (wonder who it was?) is the bad wound, but then again, with all that layer of clothing to get thru.

This is doubtless a factor, as is the extreme cold weather, which argues in favor of Jon's potential survival despite his wounds. On the other hand, other posters have pointed out that the assassins weren't using modern day pocket knives, but medieval daggers, which are essentially mini-swords.

According to Jon's thoughts, "If this is oathbreaking, the crime is mine and mine alone." So Jon clearly doesn't know it is oathbreaking. It might be, but he's not sure and he wants to protect his brothers in case it is.

Exactly. See above. Jon was protecting the NW by going alone, further evidence that he is staying true to his oaths.

I think people are getting caught up in the fact that Jon's duty and his personal inclinations were, for the first time, aligned. His duty to the NW demanded that he slaughter Boltons and Freys and, as personal matter, I'm sure he was delighted to comply.

Lending credence to Roose Bolton's opinion that Ramsay Bolton doesn't think things through. Even if Jon had not had a single Wildling volunteer, Jon Snow, son of Ned Stark, would have doubtless collected every available Northern sword on his trek south. From a Stark loyalist perspective, following Jon to kill Boltons and Freys for the purpose of preserving the NW and avenging Ned Stark while saving "Arya" is a dream come true.

[Direwolf_Warg]

You know, someone (was that you?) brought that line up recently, and also how Maester Aemon mentions that he should never have left the Wall. I'm starting to think there's something to it.

Re: how many wildlings were going with Jon,

To be fair, it seemed clear it wasn't just those nine. Those heroes and chieftains would surely lead other wildlings to join him. I believe there were as many as a thousand wildling warriors who came south with Tormund, so I expect a large proportion of those would be joining the expedition south.

What doesn't fit with that, Ran, is that Jon was planning on going alone if no one volunteered. He wasn't going to stand against the might of House Bolton alone. You could make the argument that those 9 would have brought their men, and I don't have much of a defense against that, admittedly. But neither does the army-raising side that figures Jon is going to go lay siege to Winterfell or something. Truth is, we're left to speculate because the facts aren't clear past a certain point.

I've refuted that Jon wasn't "rushing" to battle at Winterfell or in the South. We have evidence of that. He'd simply announced his intentions, and at the very least planned to find out where Ramsay Snow was from Melisandre prior to leaving. That fact that Jon was going to seek council leads one to believe his plan wasn't finished.

[Saracen]

Why where his wounds smoking? I don't get it. It seems important.

[Ran]

Oh, that's true. He wasn't just going to take off then and there.