Why is there dislike for Jon Snow?

[Sevumar]

I got that underlying point. And then I explained why that reading of others' motives is perhaps inaccurate. I'm curious about who, exactly, this "group of readers" is, who, exactly, has shown more understanding for Cersei (except WK, by admission, and only one person) than Jon, and, most of all, who's being dishonest.

I'm not going to turn this thread into an exercise in naming posters who seem to have a certain set of beliefs. Suffice it to say that it's a small cluster of people whose posts and stances I'm very familiar with and who often go to great lengths to defend Cersei and Dany, while often failing to show the same level of sympathy in discussions about, say Jon or Tyrion.

I think the central idea of "but it's not fair to be marginalized/treated as inferior for something beyond my control" should resonate with everyone. Nobody wants to be treated that way, regardless of whether the source of one's maltreatment is gender, bastardy, disability, ethnic group, or any of many other traits beyond our control. I felt that way for Jon's situation regarding his legitimacy, for Cersei's realization about discrimination against women, and for Tyrion's marginalization because of his deformity. What makes these characters different is how they react to this unfairness, not the nature of the trait being discriminated against.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

I actually do like Jon but until GRRM does a better job of fleshing out the Others, the idea that Jon is somehow engaged in the "real fight," while the rest of Westeros is just messing around really drives me nuts! It's as if everyone else is some irresponsible idiot, and only Jon has the wisdom to see the truth. But most other people just don't have the information that Jon has, and even as a reader, the Others still are very nebulous to me.

I would have more sympathy for this situation if Jon (and Jeor before him) hadn't tried to warn people about the threat and been mostly ignored. It's not that they lack the information that Jon has so much as they're ignoring it. Jon and Jeor are trying to inform them, and they'd rather squabble over a pointy metal chair instead. Which I think is the entire point being made — all anyone cares about is the Iron Throne, when actually, the Iron Throne and who sits on it isn't going to mean dick in the long run.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

What makes these characters different is how they react to this unfairness, not the nature of the trait being discriminated against.

I think this is the crux of the issue, here. Cersei's response to her inequality seems largely to be to use her sexuality and threats and scheming to gain power and "make up for" the gender gap. Tyrion's response is to harden himself with a sharp wit and cynicism, so that the insults don't affect him as much. And Jon's response is to work hard and demonstrate honor and virtue such that people can respect him despite being a bastard. He says as much himself, when he compares himself to Robb, and says that he wanted to prove wrong the adage that bastards are of inferior character.

[Jolene Brown]

But think about how even a reasonable character like Tyrion reacts to Jeor's words about the Night's Watch - I have my issues with Tyrion, but I think he's clearly intelligent, clearly open-minded. It just sounds so ridiculous, without having actually been past the Wall and encountered the Others. And wasn't Jeor more focused on the numbers issue - that the Wall was understaffed - more than the threat of the Others? Even men in the Night's Watch itself have trouble believing in the White Walkers and wights at first. And I just don't buy that if Stannis had won the Battle of Blackwater, he would have responded the same way to that letter... they are focused on a real issue that is before them - who sits on the Iron Throne may not matter in the long run, but it matters a lot right now. I don't think that's crazy when the alternative - the threat of the Others - sounds like one of Old Nan's stories.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

But think about how even a reasonable character like Tyrion reacts to Jeor's words about the Night's Watch - I have my issues with Tyrion, but I think he's clearly intelligent, clearly open-minded. It just sounds so ridiculous, without having actually been past the Wall and encountered the Others. And wasn't Jeor more focused on the numbers issue - that the Wall was understaffed - more than the threat of the Others? Even men in the Night's Watch itself have trouble believing in the White Walkers and wights at first. And I just don't buy that if Stannis had won the Battle of Blackwater, he would have responded the same way to that letter... they are focused on a real issue that is before them - who sits on the Iron Throne may not matter in the long run, but it matters a lot right now. I don't think that's crazy when the alternative - the threat of the Others - sounds like one of Old Nan's stories.

Jeor was worried about being understaffed, yeah — and that was in regards to the growing number of wildlings the Watch was having to face. Even assuming that people were reasonable to doubt the existence of wights and the Others, what's their excuse for brushing off the wildling threat? They aren't children's stories (funny how Nan's stories end up being true, huh?). :P

[loveigniting09]

I got that underlying point. And then I explained why that reading of others' motives is perhaps inaccurate. I'm curious about who, exactly, this "group of readers" is, who, exactly, has shown more understanding for Cersei (except WK, by admission, and only one person) than Jon, and, most of all, who's being dishonest.

ETA: Ok, fine, loveigniting too.

I should probably add that while I empathize with Cersei's anger towards the patriarchy, her internalized sexism and her lack of awareness re: her own hatred of women are not things I identify with. I understand Jon's problems well enough. I just have to reach a bit more to understand the damage bastardy does to him but I attribute that to the lack of modern analogues to bastardy. But anyone who's felt an outcast in their family or society can identify with Jon's general feelings, I think. My understanding for both characters does change depending on their reactions to their respective places in society. Empathy turns to pity for Cersei who is representative of what patriarchy can do to women. And I said earlier that growth is a character kink of mine so Jon growing past his bastardy woes is admirable to me.

[Jin Uzuki]

I honestly think that most people who say they dislike Jon Snow are just doing it for shock value or argument's sake. Saying you don't like Jon Snow is like saying you don't like puppies, i.e. you're just a cynical dick

There are very good reasons to dislike Jon Snow. The guy chose to join the Night Watch, and yet he thinks about leaving anytime there's a crisis involving the Starks. And the big item, ofcourse, is how he chose to respond to Ramsay Bolton's letter.

[mythsandstuff]

I'm not going to turn this thread into an exercise in naming posters who seem to have a certain set of beliefs. Suffice it to say that it's a small cluster of people whose posts and stances I'm very familiar with and who often go to great lengths to defend Cersei and Dany, while often failing to show the same level of sympathy in discussions about, say Jon or Tyrion.

Out of curiosity, how many of these "other posters" have thus far posted in this thread, justifying your dragging them into it in the first place? I just want us all to be honest about who's really fighting the gender war hereabouts.

I think the central idea of "but it's not fair to be marginalized/treated as inferior for something beyond my control" should resonate with everyone. Nobody wants to be treated that way, regardless of whether the source of one's maltreatment is gender, bastardy, disability, ethnic group, or any of many other traits beyond our control. I felt that way for Jon's situation regarding his legitimacy, for Cersei's realization about discrimination against women, and for Tyrion's marginalization because of his deformity. What makes these characters different is how they react to this unfairness, not the nature of the trait being discriminated against.

Agreed. I honestly think I said something similar several posts ago.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

There are very good reasons to dislike Jon Snow. The guy chose to join the Night Watch, and yet he thinks about leaving anytime there's a crisis involving the Starks. And the big item, ofcourse, is how he chose to respond to Ramsay Bolton's letter.

I call shenanigans. He left (and promptly turned around and came back, with some chiding) after Ned was executed and Robb went to war. He had the sense, rightfully, talked into him.

Did he desert when Winterfell was sacked? No.

Did he desert when he heard that Bran and Rickon were dead? No.

Did he desert when Arya was still missing and presumed dead? No.

Did he desert when Sansa was forced to marry Tyrion? No.

Did he desert when Robb and Catelyn were murdered? No.

Did he desert when he learned that Sansa had escaped King's Landing? No.

Did he desert when Ramsay sent the letter telling him he was marrying "Arya"? No.

So please, inquiring minds want to know — when is this "anytime" business you speak of? Hell, I've seen people on here say with a straight face that he should have acted in order to save Sansa from her marriage, that he's somehow cold or uncaring because he doesn't seem to have a regard for her.

I'm not even commenting on his reaction to Ramsay's letter because 1. I think there's far more to that than what we've been led to believe, 2. Ramsay violated neutrality just as much as Jon did, if not more, and 3. the letter threatened the Watch itself, something people often forget.

[Sevumar]

There are very good reasons to dislike Jon Snow. The guy chose to join the Night Watch, and yet he thinks about leaving anytime there's a crisis involving the Starks. And the big item, ofcourse, is how he chose to respond to Ramsay Bolton's letter.

I think there's a lot more about Jon's planned response to "Ramsay's" letter than Martin gave us in Jon's last chapter. The details of that long two hour meeting with Tormund are completely glossed over in the book and we haven't had the chance to see the reactions of any of the other players at the Wall. My view of Jon's decision is that it's within the scope of his vows to act against the letter writer's threat against the Watch. He seemed to understand that there may be disagreement about that decision, so he didn't place any other Watch members in a situation they could interpret as a breach of their vows.

Toward the beginning of the story, Jon does identify more with the Starks than the Watch when conflicts arise. But as the story goes on, he is better able to resist temptation.

[Jin Uzuki]

I call shenanigans. He left (and promptly turned around and came back, with some chiding) after Ned was executed and Robb went to war. He had the sense, rightfully, talked into him.

Did he desert when Winterfell was sacked? No.

Did he desert when he heard that Bran and Rickon were dead? No.

Did he desert when Arya was still missing and presumed dead? No.

Did he desert when Sansa was forced to marry Tyrion? No.

Did he desert when Robb and Catelyn were murdered? No.

Did he desert when he learned that Sansa had escaped King's Landing? No.

Did he desert when Ramsay sent the letter telling him he was marrying "Arya"? No.

So please, inquiring minds want to know — when is this "anytime" business you speak of? Hell, I've seen people on here say with a straight face that he should have acted in order to save Sansa from her marriage, that he's somehow cold or uncaring because he doesn't seem to have a regard for her.

I'm not even commenting on his reaction to Ramsay's letter because 1. I think there's far more to that than what we've been led to believe, 2. Ramsay violated neutrality just as much as Jon did, if not more, and 3. the letter threatened the Watch itself, something people often forget.

Read what I wrote carefully before you go on your rant. I said "think", not left. Was he not thinking about leaving when Robb called his banners to war? Was he not thinking of leaving when his father was arrested?

And ofcourse, his friends had to be bring him back when he found out Ned got his head separated from his body.

So, did that feed your "inquiring" mind, Apple Martini?

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Read what I wrote carefully before you go on your rant. I said "think", not left. Was he not thinking about leaving when Robb called his banners to war? Was he not thinking of leaving when his father was arrested?

And ofcourse, his friends had to be bring him back when he found out Ned got his head separated from his body.

So, did that feed your "inquiring" mind, Apple Martini?

"Thinking" is not "doing." If you want to hold people accountable for their thoughts, probably 99% of the people in the series should be condemned. This isn't "1984."

[Jon Wolfwalker]

Jon is my favorite character obviously. I can see why some people dislike him, but I think some take it to the extreme as seen with Sansa too.

A little off topic here but weren't the Starks the only house that helped the NW?( I remember Benjen leaving WF with horses and supplies both were gifts IIRC.) If Jon is dead then they kind of just shot themselves in the foot by killing the last person who seems to realize this and was doing everything he could to make them self sufficient again.

[Castel]

"Thinking" is not "doing." If you want to hold people accountable for their thoughts, probably 99% of the people in the series should be condemned. This isn't "1984."

While I do agree with the principle Jon did desert, if only briefly.

A little off topic here but weren't the Starks the only house that helped the NW?( I remember Benjen leaving WF with horses and supplies both were gifts IIRC.) If Jon is dead then they kind of just shot themselves in the foot by killing the last person who seems to realize this and was doing everything he could to make them self sufficient again.

False, for most of history the Starks helped the Night's watch because it was in their territory.But Yoren mentions that there are friends of the Watch in the south as he's carting Arya around. That said, the Starks may simply be their biggest patron.

[Chaircat Meow]

Read what I wrote carefully before you go on your rant. I said "think", not left. Was he not thinking about leaving when Robb called his banners to war? Was he not thinking of leaving when his father was arrested?

And ofcourse, his friends had to be bring him back when he found out Ned got his head separated from his body.

As I see it he did 'desert' when Robb called his banners and needed to be brought back. His return wasn't voluntary.

I didn't dislike him for it though. But that's because I'm a fanboy.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

While I do agree with the principle Jon did desert, if only briefly.

I know he did and I never said he didn't. What I took issue with was the idea that Jon was going to cut and run every time the Starks were in trouble.

[Jin Uzuki]

"Thinking" is not "doing." If you want to hold people accountable for their thoughts, probably 99% of the people in the series should be condemned. This isn't "1984."

"Accountable"? This isn't about taking Jon Snow to trial for accountability, Apple Martini. It's merely giving several possible reasons for people to dislike the guy. And this, in response to Hoopdescoop's comment.

[Jin Uzuki]

Good Night, Apple Martini! I have a feeling you and I will get into a lot of discussions in the future. :bang:

All in good fun and no malice, ofcourse.

[butterbumps!]

I had such a favorable opinion of Jon on my first read, that on subsequent rereads I purposely scrutinized his chapters to make sure I wasn't being unduly biased. I really can't come up with any substantial criticism about him, even when I try. I think he makes all the "right" choices. I guess this irks some readers who find that to be "too perfect," but in this godforsaken universe of incompetent and corrupt leadership within inherently unjust systems, I find relief in the sensibleness of Jon's arc. I also get a sense of satisfaction that "good things come to those who wait" from his chapters; he's patient, and doesn't take shortcuts. I don't take criticisms about the vows that seriously, to be honest. Or rather, I agree with the way Jon interprets the vows- not to the word but to the essence. I think that vows should sometimes be questioned, and I don't fault characters for doing this-- I think that holding to the word of vows has led to the "wrong" choice on a few occasions in the world of ASOIAF.

And I guess those who really dislike him didn't read the Jon-Mance and Jon-Stannis dialogue carefully :cool4: What I wouldn't give for Westeros to become a triumvirate of these 3.

[Castel]

I really can't come up with any substantial criticism about him, even when I try

Well, there's him letting Ygritte go.