Enlightening essays on Dany and Jon- ADWD (New Jon essay)

[Ser Pollo Loco]

I should reread jon´s chapters then. My first impression was that Jon knew that the north doesn´t love Bolton, but they fear him. To inspire fear is actually a good characteristic in a lord. I´m sure even the Starks built their legacy inspiring fear. Fear is a powerful force than can keep the northern lords in line.

Stannis gives the northern lords a second option to which they can rally. That to me sounds as a disrupting factor in the north.

the Starks rule through love, it s brought up more than once, and it's implied why some (most?) of the northern lords are still fighting for the Starks despite their ruin and Tywin's success is turning to shit

[Adam Feldman]

This is going to be a very frustrating discussion if it can't be considered that for a Night's Watch Lord Commander fighting a kicked off War for the Dawn, Stannis has to win (for the time being).

On my side, I am a bit frustrated that people are having a hard time considering that it was always very possible Stannis might not win and that Jon should plan and prepare for that possibility, since he has a War for the Dawn to fight. I honestly did not expect those to be controversial points. And I do not think "But Stannis has to win!" is a convincing rebuttal to them, particularly because Jon himself never justifies his actions re: Stannis in those terms.

Jon knows about Lady Hornwood. When Ramsay sends him a letter signed, "Lord of Hornwood" and shows no surprise, it's clear the story of this has drifted up to the Wall.

I don't know. The Wall is always the last to know. Jon reflects on Ramsay marrying Arya many times. He never once thinks about Lady Hornwood and her fingers, despite having every reason to. Wouldn't the Jon we know obsess about Lady Hornwood's fingers?

I am not sure what even the conclusion is, otherwise that Jon is possible rooting for Stannis to win Boltons (I mean, groundbreaking, right?).

Happy to reprint the conclusion for you: "Jon has many good reasons to help Stannis conquer the North — along with his rather less noble hatred of the Lannisters and Boltons. But Jon fails to prepare for the very real possibility that Stannis could lose, and fails to create enough distance between himself and Stannis. These failures place the Watch at great risk, and Martin uses the Pink Letter to make that very clear."

[Mladen]

Happy to reprint the conclusion for you: "Jon has many good reasons to help Stannis conquer the North — along with his rather less noble hatred of the Lannisters and Boltons. But Jon fails to prepare for the very real possibility that Stannis could lose, and fails to create enough distance between himself and Stannis. These failures place the Watch at great risk, and Martin uses the Pink Letter to make that very clear."

And I am happy to inform you that I am a good reader and that I have perfectly understood that the first time I read it... I am just surprised that conclusion is that blatantly obvious nothing more... It's like me doing an essay on Sansa's hair, and at the end I conclude it is auburn...

[LordToo-Fat-to-Sit-a-Horse]

BTW, is Yoren an oath/convention (of neutrality) breaker, by helping Arya escape KL?

Or just siding with the NW traditional allies, because he knows they will be thankful?

Jon, in my opinion deals very well with stannis given the circumstances. He trades every favor he does, for something else.

He has no way of proving he is not Stannis´s ally, short of backstabbing him.. Which sounds like something the lannisters or the boltons would demand from him as proof of his "neutrality".

So Jon has losing cards. There isn´t much Jon can do, once Stannis is a NW guest, in order to separate himself from Stannis.

Besides being the son of Ned stark also casts shadows over his dealings with the rebel lord.

[Ser Pollo Loco]

On my side, I am a bit frustrated that people are having a hard time considering that it was always very possible Stannis might not win and that Jon should plan and prepare for that possibility, since he has a War for the Dawn to fight. I honestly did not expect those to be controversial points. And I do not think "But Stannis has to win!" is a convincing rebuttal to them, particularly because Jon himself never justifies his actions re: Stannis in those terms.

I don't know. The Wall is always the last to know. Jon reflects on Ramsay marrying Arya many times. He never once thinks about Lady Hornwood and her fingers, despite having every reason to. Wouldn't the Jon we know obsess about Lady Hornwood's fingers?

Happy to reprint the conclusion for you: "Jon has many good reasons to help Stannis conquer the North — along with his rather less noble hatred of the Lannisters and Boltons. But Jon fails to prepare for the very real possibility that Stannis could lose, and fails to create enough distance between himself and Stannis. These failures place the Watch at great risk, and Martin uses the Pink Letter to make that very clear."

1) It's because you assume that jon is killed because of the pink letter and not because of his reaction of it

2) Jon (and theon) must think Arya will fight Ramsey because he they've heard good things about him. Hornwood happened back in Clash him not knowing doesn't make sense

[Mark Antony]

. It's like me doing an essay on Sansa's hair, and at the end I conclude it is auburn...

:rolleyes:

[The Human Abstract]

The characters who observe Sansa's hair color are clearly not omniscient and you cannot take their viewpoint at face value.

me doing an essay on Sansa's hair, and at the end I conclude it is auburn...

[Adam Feldman]

1) It's because you assume that jon is killed because of the pink letter and not because of his reaction of it

I don't understand your point. My criticism is just as valid before the Pink Letter comes. I am criticizing the failure of Jon to plan for and prepare for the possibility of a Bolton victory.

2) Jon (and theon) must think Arya will fight Ramsey because he they've heard good things about him. Hornwood happened back in Clash him not knowing doesn't make sense

You really find it odd that Jon would think Arya would fight a man she's forcibly married to? Clearly Jon doesn't think Ramsay is a noble, good-hearted gentleman (though Arya might fight him even if he was!). But the text shows no indication Jon knows about Lady Hornwood's fingers or Ramsay's other crimes against Northern civilians.

[Mladen]

The characters who observe Sansa's hair color are clearly not omniscient and you cannot take their viewpoint at face value.

I wish I understand this comment... There is no such thing as omniscient character in ASOIAF...

[LordToo-Fat-to-Sit-a-Horse]

the Starks rule through love, it s brought up more than once, and it's implied why some (most?) of the northern lords are still fighting for the Starks despite their ruin and Tywin's success is turning to shit

(Catelyn:) Someday these lords will look to you as their liege. If I pack you off now, like a child being sent to bed without his supper, they will remember, and laugh about it in their cups. The day will come when you need them to respect you, even fear you a little.

Sure, The North likes the Stark rule. They have proven themselves as effective leaders, able to see the region endure hard winters, for thousands of years. That doesn´t mean the Starks didn´t built this legacy over fear too.

Especially at the beginning.

[illrede]

On my side, I am a bit frustrated that people are having a hard time considering that it was always very possible Stannis might not win

Considered, embraced, unavoidable. Backing off from Stannis is such a way that it increases his chances of failure isn't something Jon should be doing.

Jon should plan and prepare for that possibility, since he has a War for the Dawn to fight.

That's a failure. His dogs breakfast had more vomit in it than he could have arranged.

[butterbumps!]

I should reread jon´s chapters then. My first impression was that Jon knew that the north doesn´t love Bolton, but they fear him. To inspire fear is actually a good characteristic in a lord. I´m sure even the Starks built their legacy inspiring fear. Fear is a powerful force than can keep the northern lords in line.

Stannis gives the northern lords a second option to which they can rally. That to me sounds as a disrupting factor in the north.

It's honestly a little subtle. Jon doesn't openly articulate that the Boltons will never hold the North, but shows surprise at the North's lack of responses to Stannis, takes into account that most of these families have either Bolton blood ties or hostages staying their hands, and reflects that they would rally around a Stark over a Bolton any day. And the fact that there are only a handful of lords in that Barrowton vision supports Jon's instinct that the North is hardly unified under the Boltons.

I don't know. The Wall is always the last to know. Jon reflects on Ramsay marrying Arya many times. He never once thinks about Lady Hornwood and her fingers, despite having every reason to. Wouldn't the Jon we know obsess about Lady Hornwood's fingers?

The entire North knows about the Lady Hornwood unpleasantness. Jon's with Qhorin at the time it happened, but by DwD I, it seems he's been filled in on the Northern situation. The fact that he doesn't question why Ramsay is signing as the Lord of Hornwood and has immediate horror over the prospect of Ramsay's marrying Arya speaks to the idea that Jon's fully aware of this.

I'm not sure I understand the objection about how Jon doesn't bring up the fact that helping Stannis = helping the Watch, and that this is part of the same war. This was established in the last 2 Jon chapters of aSoS, so the premise wrt helping Stannis is already rooted in Jon's conviction that the fates of the two are inextricable.

[The Human Abstract]

Damn. I thought that was a pretty good joke.

I wish I understand this comment... There is no such thing as omniscient character in ASOIAF...

[butterbumps!]

As a side note, I don't know if all meta commentary about the essays is all that fair. People write essays on here all the time, and they aren't subject to "this shows us nothing new" or "this is all obvious." I get that the essays themselves are posted on a different site, but since the author is participating here, I think those comments aren't very fair, especially because I'd hazard the guess that most of us wouldn't want our essays on here greeted with the same sort of commentary. The essays are, in fairness, analytical, I just don't happen to agree with the Jon ones.

[SeanF]

There's not a lot Jon can do, in the event of a Bolton victory. Cersei has made plain that he's a marked man, simply by virtue of the Watch having accepted Stannis' help, and having rejected Janos Slynt as Lord Commander.

[SeanF]

As a side note, I don't know if all meta commentary about the essays is all that fair. People write essays on here all the time, and they aren't subject to "this shows us nothing new" or "this is all obvious." I get that the essays themselves are posted on a different site, but since the author is participating here, I think those comments aren't very fair, especially because I'd hazard the guess that most of us wouldn't want our essays on here greeted with the same sort of commentary. The essays are, in fairness, analytical, I just don't happen to agree with the Jon ones.

I agree. I've enjoyed the essays.

[Adam Feldman]

I'm not sure I understand the objection about how Jon doesn't bring up the fact that helping Stannis = helping the Watch, and that this is part of the same war. This was established in the last 2 Jon chapters of aSoS, so the premise wrt helping Stannis is already rooted in Jon's conviction that the fates of the two are inextricable.

The objection is: After ASOS, there are five passages where Jon thinks that he should not help or root for Stannis specifically because the Watch takes no part, but ends up doing so anyway. Never, in any of these passages, does he think anything like "But I must do so for the greater good of the struggle against the Others." It can be argued that way, as people here are. But Jon doesn't argue it that way. So Martin seems to be indicating that Jon is helping and rooting for Stannis for other reasons. If the question was settled in ASOS, why is it still a live issue in Jon's thoughts? Perhaps because Jon views helping Stannis take the North as a much thornier question than merely hosting Stannis at the Wall to prepare for an Others War?

As a side note, I don't know if all meta commentary about the essays is all that fair. People write essays on here all the time, and they aren't subject to "this shows us nothing new" or "this is all obvious." I get that the essays themselves are posted on a different site, but since the author is participating here, I think those comments aren't very fair, especially because I'd hazard the guess that most of us wouldn't want our essays on here greeted with the same sort of commentary. The essays are, in fairness, analytical, I just don't happen to agree with the Jon ones.

Thanks! I love feedback, criticism, and debate, but snarky and snide "above-it-all" dismissals are rather rude.

[Ser Pollo Loco]

As a side note, I don't know if all meta commentary about the essays is all that fair. People write essays on here all the time, and they aren't subject to "this shows us nothing new" or "this is all obvious." I get that the essays themselves are posted on a different site, but since the author is participating here, I think those comments aren't very fair, especially because I'd hazard the guess that most of us wouldn't want our essays on here greeted with the same sort of commentary. The essays are, in fairness, analytical, I just don't happen to agree with the Jon ones.

I'll respond later with a more analytical post, but this is very true, the essay's are very good and i agree with about 90% of it

[Mladen]

As a side note, I don't know if all meta commentary about the essays is all that fair. People write essays on here all the time, and they aren't subject to "this shows us nothing new" or "this is all obvious." I get that the essays themselves are posted on a different site, but since the author is participating here, I think those comments aren't very fair, especially because I'd hazard the guess that most of us wouldn't want our essays on here greeted with the same sort of commentary. The essays are, in fairness, analytical, I just don't happen to agree with the Jon ones.

Well, in all sincerity, I enjoyed Daenerys essays, I just find this one as Apple Martini said, underwhelming... As for essays here, let we be honest, we all sometimes praise someone's work and sometimes criticize it. There is nothing bad or disrespectful in it. I understand that most of us wouldn't like to be welcomed that way. I know I wouldn't, but that should not prevent us in giving our honest opinions in the non-insulting way. I don't find this essay as good as some others, but I believe that I have right to express my opinion, as I am perfectly aware that people might and should do the same to me when I am on the line...

[Roadside Rose]

I haven't read the Jon essays yet, but I have read the ones on Meereen, and enjoyed reading them. They actually made Slaver's Bay really interesting for me, and I have been re-reading Dany's ADWD storyline since.

And I have to agree with butterbumps,

As a side note, I don't know if all meta commentary about the essays is all that fair. People write essays on here all the time, and they aren't subject to "this shows us nothing new" or "this is all obvious."I get that the essays themselves are posted on a different site, but since the author is participating here, I think those comments aren't very fair, especially because I'd hazard the guess that most of us wouldn't want our essays on here greeted with the same sort of commentary.