Learning to lead III: the search for decisive actions, a re-read project of the Daenerys and Jon chapters from ADWD

[Dr. Pepper]

<lots of quote snips re: Jon and Mel>

In the Mel chapter we reviewed in the last thread, Tze pointed out Mel's seeming obsession with getting Jon to trust her and her misguided ways of going about that. In actuality, everything Mel has done has just caused Jon to mistrust her more. He has never sought out her counsel or assistance because she has never provided any reason for him to assume she has anything valuable to offer. He specifically notes in one chapter that he recognized Mel had power but also that she was someone he never wanted to be indebted to. Mel, on the other hand, thinks Jon is foolish for not trusting her. She decides to gain his trust by telling him a vision she has of his sister arriving at Castle Black on a dying horse and at the same time reveals that she has lied to everyone about having burned Mance. "Arya" was already coming to CB, Mel just wanted to show (pretend?) that she was oh so helpful and invaluable to Jon by revealing Mance and suggesting that Mance go to meet and escort her. Even if the girl had turned out to be Arya, this is still someone who was obviously fleeing from something to request protection and assistance from the Night's Watch, an order sworn to protect the realms of men. Jon would have been honor-bound to provide protection to the fleeing girl....which he provides to Alys when she does show up at the wall.

Anyway, after all of Mel's mishaps and her misguided attempts to make Jon trust her and seek her out for counsel (which serves only to make him mistrust her more for obvious reasons), he has no reason to believe that she would do anything to actually help him, even if he placed himself in her debt by requesting aide, a position of debt he specifically doesn't want to be in with her, and for good reason. He knows that these Queen's Men are actually Mel's men and though I don't think he understands the full implications of this, he does understand the significance and he especially understands that she's playing games that are counter to his cause and plans.

That Jon realizes that these Queen's Men are actually Mel's men also indicates that she wanted them there for a reason. Perhaps in the hopes that he would be pushed further to request her help? The ironic part here is that if Mel had stood up among these southerners and loudly proclaimed that all people at the wall, including the wildlings and giant, should be accorded proper respect as any high noble by virtue of them all being guests, she would have gone a long way to gaining Jon's trust. He spoke quite clearly on multiple occasions in this chapter of his respect for guest right, and that Mel didn't use this to further her own game says a lot about her ability to accurately read all sorts of things.

I'm actually sort of getting this feeling that Mel cannot truly use her powers (whatever power that might be) on others without some form of debt. She isn't able to convince or sway Davos or Jon, and it might be that they didn't incur a debt with her, though Mel makes note in her chapter that she held Devan back as a mercy for Davos. I wonder if she thinks to say this to Davos in the future in the hopes that his replay will be, "I am in your debt."

[Arya Targaryen]

That sounds somewhat dubious. I'd not equate "passing note" with "memorized their faces." Also, keep in mind, it's been more than a year since that feast.

You may be right there, but I think, since Arya is the one looking like a Stark, Mance would remember her at least. I don't think he would recognize Bran or Rickon, but he must have realized, that Arya was the only one (apart from Jon), who looks like a Stark (eyes, hair, face...). So in case he sees a girl of the right age, he should be able to realize whether she is Arya or not.

[Arya Targaryen]

Actually, many posters over the years have argued quite persuasively that Jon should not have accepted the position of Lord Commander for the very reason that it instantly ended all hope of getting aid from the Iron Throne or any of the ruling houses of Westeros.

Personally, I don't think it mattered on that account because they were never going to receive aid anyway.

That said, there was always a big danger in having Jon as Lord Commander if Stannis lost.

There is one serious problem with that: Stannis IS at the Wall, when the election takes place, and the NW is outnumbered by his men. If Jon doesn't take the job it would have been Slynt, probably. With Tywin dead, and the Lannisters weaking, I don't think that would have been a wise choice, considering the Iron Throne's opinion (as they have their own problems). And even Slynt was like "Oh King Stannis, enlighten us, poor fools, what to do". If Stannis had asked for the castles, more supplies, etc from Slynt, he would have done anything, he would have given anything. How would that look with the Boltons, then? Cleary, Jon is a much bigger risk for them, since he knows Arya well enough, and there is also the danger that the North will rally around him. But by the time of the election Jon couldn't have known that.

[Lummel]

... Even if the girl had turned out to be Arya, this is still someone who was obviously fleeing from something to request protection and assistance from the Night's Watch, an order sworn to protect the realms of men. Jon would have been honor-bound to provide protection to the fleeing girl....which he provides to Alys when she does show up at the wall...

I'm actually sort of getting this feeling that Mel cannot truly use her powers (whatever power that might be) on others without some form of debt. She isn't able to convince or sway Davos or Jon, and it might be that they didn't incur a debt with her, though Mel makes note in her chapter that she held Devan back as a mercy for Davos. I wonder if she thinks to say this to Davos in the future in the hopes that his replay will be, "I am in your debt."

I don't know if the oath to protect the realms of men can be boiled down to require that assistance and support be given to any man or woman who comes to the Watch, I see this as Jon playing fast and loose with involvement in Northern politics.

I am very taken with your notion of debt though. Perhaps in Martin world this is a specifically R'hllorist thing - remember Jaqen and the three lives oued to the Red God.

More to the point of our leadership theme and with a nice fat copy of The Power Broker waiting for me to read it, the creation and exchange of debts or favours (again remember the favour bank in Bonfire of the Vanities?) is a classic way of building up of power and influence. In short Melisandre is something of a schmoozer, an influence peddler and a favour hound. In our world she would be a furious networker and if you ever appeared in a yearbook with her - beware! You'd be milked for the contents of your rollerdex.

Interesting neither Daenerys nor Jon are so politically aware in the same way. They don't seem to be looking to create debts or call in favours rather they both rely or expect personal connections to be synonymous with loyalty - just thinking of their attitudes to Tormund and Brown Ben Plumm.

[Julian Rayne]

He isn't even Westerosi, but he holds himself with an air of respect; I assume that as an ambassador of the Bank he comports himself in way that is respectful and amenable to local customs, and I see him as a very cosmopolitan figure.

I think as the new Q&A indicates, Bravosi in general are more cosmopolitan, tolerant and diplomatic than almost anyone else. Not that they don;t have their share of prats of course, but they have a larger pool of diplomatic people to call on.

I think that makes sense, but on the other hand, I think he's actively trying to make sure that he's not indebted to her in any way.

I agree. However it's interesting that when she doesn't support him (the Hardhome expedition), he gets angry at her. I'm not sure what that says about him.

Regarding Wun Wun, in real history, accusations of cannibalism have often used as an excuse for "othering" and dehumanizing. Here Wun Wun isn't a human of course but in biology, intelligence and personality he practically is. Especially in contrast to th Wights and Others. I think the Southrons are making the classic mistake of underestimating the intelligence of someone who isn't fluent in the their (Southron's) native language.

I see the giants are ape-like, in which case vegetarianism is pretty logical. Their size living up north isn't an issue--think of mammoths, wholly rhinos, etc that used to thrive in frozen lands.

I always thought of them as yeti. Yeti are vegetarian aren't they?

[Winter's Knight]

And as I try to remind people who never seem to remember, neutrality goes both goddamn ways. What right does Ramsay have to demand Selyse, Val, Shireen, etc.?

Selyse and Shireen are the wife and daughter of an attainted traitor. Ramsay has every right to demand them.

[The Snow King]

Selyse and Shireen are the wife and daughter of an attainted traitor. Ramsay has every right to demand them.

You mean that a traitor that serves an abomination born from incest has a right to demand the family of rightful king? :)

There are no right answers at that point, only pretenders. With a number of kings, whose demand you value higher?

[Winter's Knight]

You mean that a traitor that serves an abomination born from incest has a right to demand the family of rightful king? :)

There are no right answers at that point, only pretenders. With a number of kings, whose demand you value higher?

The one holds the throne?

AM asked what right the Boltons had to demand Stannis' family and the answer is that they were traitors to the ctown.

[The guy from the Vale]

The one holds the throne?

AM asked what right the Boltons had to demand Stannis' family and the answer is that they were traitors to the ctown.

But if Jon did hand over Selyse and Shireen, he'd be taking a side in the conflict.

Really, Jon will be taking sies no matter what he does. Doing nothing is not an option, neither when Stannis arrives nor when the pink letter arrives. What should he do so noone can claim he's taking part? And the Night's Watch doesn't owe fealty to any king; that's part of the neutrality.

[butterbumps!]

I don't know if the oath to protect the realms of men can be boiled down to require that assistance and support be given to any man or woman who comes to the Watch, I see this as Jon playing fast and loose with involvement in Northern politics.

I agree with part of this. The Iron Throne (or the 7 kingdoms, whichever it may be) are supposed to offer "no strings attached" aid to the Wall-- supplies, men, etc. I agree that the NW is not bound to reciprocate. I do, though, think that providing hospitality is requisite-- when Queen Alysanne visited, the NW put her up and treated her as a guest; I think that Jon's quartering of Stannis' men is much the same. The "extra" aid is the way Jon counsels Stannis on the best way to rally the North.

I think Jon is interpreting the rules loosely, yes, but I think that is a good thing. It gets to the essence of what the vows say and bucks the (non-vow) tradition of "taking no part." I praise Dany for overturning immoral/ outdated rules and customs; I think I'm doing the same for Jon as it pertains. There's sometimes a bigger picture where the rules or traditions ought to be challenged, and the fact that Jon is doing this is part of what I respect so much.

[Budj]

But if Jon did hand over Selyse and Shireen, he'd be taking a side in the conflict.

Really, Jon will be taking sies no matter what he does. Doing nothing is not an option, neither when Stannis arrives nor when the pink letter arrives. What should he do so noone can claim he's taking part? And the Night's Watch doesn't owe fealty to any king; that's part of the neutrality.

Exactly. And if you have to pick a side you might as well pick the side of the guy that actually responded to your call for help.

[kg1982]

The interesting thing about the Pink Letter is that Ramsay wrote it... It was the ramblings of a desperate villain. Roose would have never wrote that letter, which suggests that Roose is probably dead.

I think that Roose was well aware of th source of Stan's battle strategy. But chose to ignore that Jon was actively supporting Stan. It made no sense for him to actively antagonize the NW.

[Lummel]

Wait, wait, wait.

What is with all this discussion of the Pink Letter? This is a reread thread not a Pink Letter thread. So far we have had Jon IX not Jon XIII. Once we get to Jon XIII the Pink Letter will be a relevant topic of discussion. We are having a reread thread precisely to focus on the parts that are commonly overlooked not because there is some board wide shortage of Pink letter threads or Dany hate threads!

Ahem.

Yes, Butterbumps! Providing hospitality to Queen Alysanne is one thing or for that matter Tyrion in AGOT but I feel once we start to look at what Jon was providing to Stannis then we are already in a grey area and certainly beyond hospitality even broadly interpreted, depending on your point of view Jon is possibly out of a grey zone and into interfering in the politics of Westeros.

I like your broader point of comparison between Daenerys and Jon and the distinction between ...er.... formal and psychological contracts or maybe better said in more everyday language laws and traditions but there is a difference in that Daenerys is a supreme executive authority while Jon is formally working within a system of authority (ie that of the seven kingdoms of Westeros) which formally he still somehow has to negotiate even in a civil war situation.

My gut feeling is to agree that being bound by traditions which are not in changed times necessarily still relevant is a bad thing but at the same time Jon still has to work in a broader political context and has (arguably) less freedom of movement than Daenerys. You have to assume that there are going to be consequences in going against the political tide (having said that of course there are consequences for Daenerys too in rejecting the political status quo, as Xaro and New Ghis and so on seek to push by force of arms Meereen back into to it's slave trading relationship with them).

[Arya Targaryen]

Yes, Butterbumps! Providing hospitality to Queen Alysanne is one thing or for that matter Tyrion in AGOT but I feel once we start to look at what Jon was providing to Stannis then we are already in a grey area and certainly beyond hospitality even broadly interpreted, depending on your point of view Jon is possibly out of a grey zone and into interfering in the politics of Westeros.

Well, he is definitely providing less than Stannis demands. Given he is outnumbered by Stannis' men, Jon cannot say outright to Stannis, "go to hell, I have to stay out of politics. Ha cannot say "I give you nothing" He does whatever he can to give Stannis the least he can without making him upset. He may go into a grey area, but he doesn't have the chance to stay clean, only to be even more grey.

A good question though:

Let's imagine Stannis is not at the Wall, never was, and Jon is the LC, minding his own business. And then one day the real Arya turns up (instead of Alys). She comes to visit her brother, last remaining relative, and she is welcome. She tells Jon that they want to force her to marry Ramsey, but she escaped. What would be the right thing to do? Turn her over to Ramsey against her will? Send her secretly to Braavos? What if she was being chased (like Cregan did) by Ramsey's men? No secret mission then. Is Jon within his rights to put Ramsey and his men into an ice cell if he attacks the NW? And if he says he is the heir to Winterfell? Does that count? I mean, if Jon gives him Arya, isn't it interfering as well (apart from a very clear violation of guest right)?

[Maia]

Wow, this thread is positively galloping! Anyway, a few things:

I highly approve of Jon taking the credit from the Iron Bank. It was his only chance to keep all the people he is assembling in the Gifts fed and prevent them from devastating the North.

What doesn't seem plausible to me is why the Iron Bank would give Jon a big enough credit not just to feed thousands of people for years, but also to transport all that food across the wintry sea. Now, iRL sailing navigation at similar latitudes stopped during the winter - it was too dangerous. So, just transporting the food is going to cost pretty penny.

Add to that the repayment can't even start until a year or so into Spring and that the North is poor, the NW is even poorer - so what does it have to offer to cover the debt?. Timber, OK, but does it makes economical sense to transport it over such distances? And Braavos must have had another source for it too, since it always had a large navy.

I have the same problem with Stannis's loan - IIRC Cersei didn't even default completely, just unilaterally stopped the payment of percentages on the credit, while Stannis would need several years to be in position to even _start_ paying them. And he'd have to collect them from a realm much more devastated by another round of war and a multi-year severe winter. And of course, everybody else who owes them debts would find it extremely difficult/impossible to pay as well, with such an additional burden. This just doesn't make any sense to me, to be honest.

Speaking of Alys Karstark, I don't quite see her actions as _choosing_ Jon over Stannis, or Boltons, for that matter. The fact is, Stannis was far away, travelling, his location uncertain, she didn't have a prayer of reaching him.

And her usurping relatives allied themselves with the Boltons, so no reason to hope from help from that quarter. She went to Jon, because he was the only option, pure and simple, not because Starks are so magical. She had to gamble that Jon would hate the Boltons enough to oppose their allies, legally or not.

The funny thing is, that if Bolton could have foreseen the Karstark debacle, he probably wouldn't have sent Harrion off to Duskendale... and lawful Lord Harrion Karstark would have now been his trusted ally :).

I also can't help but point out how dumb Rickard Karstark really was - even his teenage daughter could see that taking all his sons along and leaving all the cousins and their sons at home (!) was a bad idea.

Melisandre saw the vision before they were married. Mance played AT THE WEDDING FEAST, remember? If Arya hadn't yet married Ramsay and was rescued from the road,

Surelly, the road is under the purview of Lord Paramount of the North and not some kind of neutral territory? Unless it is the stretch that goes through the Gifts, you could argue that NW rules there.

And as I try to remind people who never seem to remember, neutrality goes both goddamn ways. What right does Ramsay have to demand Selyse, Val, Shireen, etc.?

I don't think that NW neutrality could be construed as the right to hide the enemies of Lord Paramount/the king indefinitely. Unless they take the Black, that is. I don't see the Starks putting up with such a notion and Boltons certainly wouldn't either.

how the whole "the NW doesn't take part" is not actually a sactified part of the vow, but a traditional status quo.

It may not be part of the vow, but it is almost certainly part of the law under which NW has operated for all these millenia. I mean, normal people aren't required to give oaths to observe the laws either, yet they are held liable when they break them.

By removing the possibility for the Boltons to sit in Winterfell, this would potentially enable a more cooperative family to hold the North, thus helping the NW protect the realms of man.

What evidence is there that the Boltons would be "uncooperative" if they were convincingly apprised of the situation and were able to respond? Jon's own advice to Stannis underlined the fact that it was to Boltons' benefit to be seen as protectors of the North from outside invaders.

Nor were any Stark loyalist families more helpful, including Robb himself.

Now, unbeknowest to Jon, and in large part due to the "fake Arya" issue and to him being LC, Boltons probably wouldn't have been cooperative while Jon lived. But Jon couldn't have known it, so his decisions in that matter had little to do with good of the realm or duty to NW.

In fact, but for Ramsey being a mad monster (which Jon doesn't know either), IMHO Boltons would have been a much better bet for protecting the North against the Others than Stannis.

The thing being as they are, Jon is sorta "right", but for all the wrong reasons. Which is a pity, IMHO. The necessity to work with Roose Bolton in the cause of the defence of the Realms of Men would have been a true test of Jon's character and generally an awesome piece of dramatic tension.

Re: Melisandre, I never understood why Jon decided after this that her visions were useless - after all, she very accurately predicted a girl looking somewhat like Arya coming to Castle Black. Now, interpretation may have been off, but the truth of her vision was undeniable.

Useless southrons - yep. But then, they were dregs of Stannis's forces and some of worthiest men went off with Edric Storm to begin with. OTOH, why is Ser Patrek so richly dressed? He is just a hedge knight without even a surname. Curious...

[Lummel]

That's a good point Arya Targaryen

We are told that the Lord Commander is one of or equal to one of the Great Lords of the realm in ASOS and there is a strong tradition that the night's watch takes no part in the internal politics of the realm, but clearly by ommission or commision Jon does and can't avoid doing so.

So on the one hand the Lord Commander is an independant political role in Westeros but at the same time is entirely dependant on the Stark in Winterfell maintaining political order in the North so that the LC can act in a neutral manner.

[Arya Targaryen]

In fact, but for Ramsey being a mad monster (which Jon doesn't know either), IMHO Boltons would have been a much better bet for protecting the North against the Others than Stannis.

I think he does. When he receives the wedding invitation, he is afraid of even thinking of the wedding night, if half of that is true what he heard of Ramsey. The Bastard must have a reputation (but I admit, he surely is even worse)

[Ragnorak]

I think Jon's choices relative to the neutrality of the Watch probably deserves its own thread.

Aemon's speech is one of my favorite scenes in the whole series and it probably is a good starting point because it speaks directly to this point of conflicts among duty, honor, and family, On top of this honor vs duty vs family dynamic you have Jon's conclusions regarding things that must be worth more than one man's honor-- most recently breaking (or at least twisting into a pretzel) his vow to Stannis to keep Val close. In the end I think the picture is far more complicated than "my sister or my duty."

The Yoren scene with Lorch also has possibilities. Yoren was certainly "taking part" by smuggling Arya but Lorch didn't know that and it made no difference. The Arya connection is interesting because Yoren tells Ned that since Benjen is his brother so is Ned. I think this has lots of compare and contrast material.

Aemon speaks at length about the "take's no part" history of the Watch including how Black Harren's brother was Lord Commander with 10,000 men when Aegon killed him and how the sons of the First Men stayed at their posts during the Andal invasion. Neither Aegon or the Andals ever considered removing the potential heirs to their newly conquered territory from the Watch though. The Watch couldn't have "taken no part" if they did. So I'm not sure we have a direct parallel in history for this.

"A king protects his people, or he is no king at all.” In this sense Stannis is the one true King and that complicates matters even more. The Iron Throne has an obligation to respond when the Watch calls for help. Only Stannis did and he literally saved the lives of every single member of the Watch. How much does Jon owe him for that? He took the army that would have been protecting his wife and daughter and used it to save the Watch so he had to take his wife and daughter with him. How far do the laws hospitality go in this regard before crossing into the "taking part" territory? To what extent does the Throne's failure to live up to its obligations, absolve Jon in addressing the fallout of the Throne's failure?

This is just very involved material and probably needs a well crafted starting point to guide the discussion.

*edited for spelling*

[The Snow King]

The one holds the throne?

AM asked what right the Boltons had to demand Stannis' family and the answer is that they were traitors to the ctown.

Thrones helps, but does not make a king. 'Traitors to the crown' is empty catchphrase, when there are at least two know pretenders for it, the choice which one is legitimate is personal. So far, Jon did not swear fealty to either one, so that argument is without merit.

What doesn't seem plausible to me is why the Iron Bank would give Jon a big enough credit not just to feed thousands of people for years, but also to transport all that food across the wintry sea. Now, iRL sailing navigation at similar latitudes stopped during the winter - it was too dangerous. So, just transporting the food is going to cost pretty penny.

Add to that the repayment can't even start until a year or so into Spring and that the North is poor, the NW is even poorer - so what does it have to offer to cover the debt?. Timber, OK, but does it makes economical sense to transport it over such distances? And Braavos must have had another source for it too, since it always had a large navy.

I have the same problem with Stannis's loan - IIRC Cersei didn't even default completely, just unilaterally stopped the payment of percentages on the credit, while Stannis would need several years to be in position to even _start_ paying them. And he'd have to collect them from a realm much more devastated by another round of war and a multi-year severe winter. And of course, everybody else who owes them debts would find it extremely difficult/impossible to pay as well, with such an additional burden. This just doesn't make any sense to me, to be honest.

The behaviour of the Iron Bank is a curious one, but maybe we should consider the fact that it's not just a bout the money. Braavos is rich, Iron Bank is even more, they can afford to think long-term or even lose money if there are some other, immaterial gains in it. Besides we do not know how much Jon wants to borrow, it may be a lot for the impoverished Night's Watch, but just pocket money for Tycho.

The Night's Watch has a wide swath of unused land, and a lot of natural resources in the area. Timber may just be one of those resources. It may be possible that the Iron Bank can see a way for the NW to pay off their debt when winter ends, with a solid profit. They can see opportunities there that even the northmen do not. That is one possibility. One even more prosaic would be that they just want as many institutions in Westeros bound with debt to them, so that they can influence them. Then they wouldn't care that the debtor cannot pay enough - they would just have the influence forever.

Then again, Iron Bank may work with different purpose. There are hints that they are connected to the Faceless Men. Who knows, maybe they just want to discreetly improve humanity chances in the upcoming war with Others? It seems unlikely, but is not impossible, there is a lot we do not know about Braavos.

Stannis credit is similar matter. Obviously his prospects don't look that great right now, but if they did, would he even need the loan? It may be a simple investment on the side of the Iron Bank, to ensure that the future king of Westeros is indebted to them. Just as well, they may just consider the money lost but be content with the amount of trouble Stannis can create for the Lannisters. Cersei decided to deny Iron Bank it's due, so they may have decided that a demonstration why you don't mess with them is reason enough to open a credit line for Lannister enemies. After all, the bankers have a reputation to uphold, as without it the idea of not paying may spread around.

Other factor is that they certainly have to know about Dany, having agents in around the world, yet even as she seems to fight the slavers they are not in a rush to help her. They probably also know about Aegon at this point. Braavos has no love for dragonlords, so they may have decided to credit Stannis, just to make sure no Targaryen will retake the Iron Throne, and consider it a small price.

And after all, credit does not mean so much without the means to spend it. What will Jon buy? Food, maybe some weapons, obsidian possibly. We do not know how hard it is to get in the free cities, but maybe it's that much money. The south of Westeros is still far from starving, even with the war (the are of Trident, may be a different matter, but the population there has been decimated anyway). Stannis needs some money, but will also have hard time to spend too much of it. After all, what big expenses can he have? He needs people, but that he can only get by winning Westerosi lord, not with money. He may want to buy some mercenary company, however the best and most expensive one are already on contract, Golden Company with Aegon, most of the rest in Slaver's Bay.

I think that Iron Bank has some shrewd people making decisions, and they know they will not loose much on this.

ETA:

Re: Melisandre, I never understood why Jon decided after this that her visions were useless - after all, she very accurately predicted a girl looking somewhat like Arya coming to Castle Black. Now, interpretation may have been off, but the truth of her vision was undeniable.

But the visions are useless at best, and sometimes dangerous and detrimental to the decision process. The can be potentially useful, but I've yet to see one in the books that is, however remotely. Though I am not sure if Jon realises that, he rather does not listen to Mel because he does not trut her, not because prophecies are useless.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Selyse and Shireen are the wife and daughter of an attainted traitor. Ramsay has every right to demand them.

If Jon did turn them over he'd be taking a side, would he not? And we cannot have that.

Men under the protection of the Night's Watch (like Yoren's band) can't just be hauled off because the goldcloaks think they committed a crime or are wanted men. Why should it be different for women?

Tell you what — Ramsay can demand them all he wants. Jon can also tell him to go fuck himself.