Climbing the Spitball Wall - An Unsullied's Take on A Song of Ice and Fire - Reading Complete! Now onto Rewatching the Show and Anticipating Season 6!

[Trisan]

Since Shimpy has read the chapter, I'm gonna publish again my personal theory about gresycale : 

 

Maybe extreme cold wakes up the disease back or kills some of Shireen's natural immunities against it that she would have developed surviving it as a child), rendering her contagious again... 

 

Terra's point about wildlings killing infants at an early age when they show signs of disease actually is a valid point and would tend to contradict my theory in which the Free Folk would know more of the disease, but who knows... 

 

But yeah, it sure sounds as if greyscale is gonna be a major thing in times to come, with two possible patient zero...

Not for shimpy :

and with one in the south (Jon Con / alternatively Jorah if he comes back to Westeros alive in the show, but there would be no point in killing him before he brings the disease if that's Jon Con's purpose in the books) and Shireen in the north, things can get ugly really quickly !

Edited January 28, 2016 by Trisan

[stillshimpy]

Cersei's chapter was a good one, but I can't say I discovered much in it that shed a lot of new light.  I was pleased as freaking punch that Margaery got the hell out of her cell while Cersei was left in one.  I absolutely hated that Cersei's too easily seen through attempts to frame her had seemingly worked.  I admit that it is fun to see Cersei laid a bit low by all her plotting and scheming and that someone else has taken over as regent, because Cersei was god awful at it.  

 

I like Kevan Lannister, by the way, but between his almost complete absence from the show and the fact that he's the only Lannister who seems to have a normal range of human emotion that isn't directed in unhealthy directions?  Yeah, Uncle Kevan's going to catch a fever or something the next time Littlefinger blows through town.  

 

Okay, so Big Bird/High Sparrow in the books is actually a character I kind of dig.  It's just so delightful to see someone completely immune to Cersei's charms and manipulations.  There's a lot of suggestion that Loras didn't die, which actually gladdens my heart.   I do have to admit that I wish Mountainstein wasn't in the books, but with all the White Cloak, tell Qyburn it's time stuff....he obviously is. 

 

I think I felt sorrier for that Blue Bard guy than I did almost any character, because unlike someone like Theon, who has remarkably similar things happen to him, he didn't do anything at all that would have made it seem like "As awful as this all is, it is all the more pitiable that your own jackass choices put you in this position" ...instead, the worst he could be accused of is being a little vainglorious. 

It's particularly awful that he paid so dearly for such a common failing, when Cersei is the queen of conceit and she had that done to him, because she fears Maggie the Frog was predicting Margaery.  

[WSmith84]

Definitely one of the weirder choices that the show made was the homosexuality angle of the sparrows. For one, Cersei's plan looks even more insane than it does in the books. Her plan seemed to be: have Loras arrested by the Faith, have a prostitute testify against him with evidence that would be laughed out of a soap opera, have Margaery swear that she had no knowledge of Loras' homosexuality and somehow twist that to make her guilty of lying and hope that Tommen is so ineffectual that he just allows his wife to be arrested. Then there was the fact that the sparrows looked so gleeful whenever they got an opportunity to attack a homosexual. I mean, I'm no fan of organised religion, but it's definitely a lot more frigging nuanced than that. Reducing it down to religion=bad seems more than a little insulting.

[WindyNights]

I remember in AFFC there's a line where Cersei almost feels guilty about the Blue Bard but then blames the Blue Bard's fate on Marge and thinking that Marge is tainting her.

[mac123x]

like Kevan Lannister, by the way, but between his almost complete absence from the show and the fact that he's the only Lannister who seems to have a normal range of human emotion that isn't directed in unhealthy directions?  Yeah, Uncle Kevan's going to catch a fever or something the next time Littlefinger blows through town. 

 

You add in Aunt Gemma and cousin Devan and it seems like the Lannisters who weren't directly under Tywin's thumb actually came out pretty decent.  I wonder if Lancel would have been normal if he hadn't attracted Cercei's ... attentions.  Book 5 spoiler: 

Fever, crossbow bolt to the gut, tomato tomahto

 

I think I felt sorrier for that Blue Bard guy than I did almost any character, because unlike someone like Theon, who has remarkably similar things happen to him, he didn't do anything at all that would have made it seem like "As awful as this all is, it is all the more pitiable that your own jackass choices put you in this position" ...instead, the worst he could be accused of is being a little vainglorious.

 

It doesn't pay to be a singer in Westeros it seems.  Mark Smeaton, err I mean Blue Bard got railroaded, Marrilion lost his eyes then jumped to his death, Tyrion had someone chopped up into a stew, Daeron got fed to the eels by Arya.  At least the last three were somewhat unsympathetic, poor BB was just a good singer.  Makes me fear for Tom-o-Sevens, the BwoB spy currently wintering in Riverrun with the Freys.

[Haleth]

And if Abel is caught in Winterfell...

[Ashara Payne]

I bought my daughter some GoT FunkoPop characters for Xmas. When we sat down to play the board game, someone suggested she put them on the table. When we asked where Cersei was, she said 'I'm torturing her'.

[WindyNights]

@Ashara That is the most creepily adorable thing ever. How old is she? Haha

[Ashara Payne]

She's 18!

[Alayne Stone]

I'm on my Feast reread right now and Cersei has a moment when thinking about Senelle where she *almost* feels guilty about what she's done to her as well ... but then just brushes it aside at the last moment. She has very rare, sliver moments of being vaguely conscious that what she's doing is absolutely utterly horrible ... and then they are gone like words and wind.

 

Val's comment about the greyscale always startled me too. She's genuinely afraid of the girl. Anytime I get to that scene I always read it closely to see if I missed anything from the last time.

 

Shimpy's going to love the epilogue. Muhahahaha. Kudos to everyone for not even so much as hinting at what's coming soon.

 

I can't remember, are there two Cersei chapters in this book? Has Shimpy already read about the part where Cersei's clearly just playing it low key at the moment and plotting to make her come back?

[Haleth]

She's 18!

Oh, thank goodness! I was picturing a 5yo. Lol

[mac123x]

Alayne:

 

Shimpy still hasn't gotten to the Walk of Shame chapter

[ambi76]

There's a lot of suggestion that Loras didn't die, which actually gladdens my heart.

 

You refer to the "but her brother ..." "shut your noisy mouth!" septa exchange I guess, but I'm actually still not sure if they weren't talking about another brother of Marg than Loras here, since she has like three in the books (and Willas* is the one called pious at one point), so not trying to get too excited for my baby.

 

*Speculative spoilers

I think show!Olenna is getting much of the important!Willas-stuff-to-come (any minute now) there, for example her trying to bribe the High Sparrow, or maybe brokering a Tyrell-Martell alliance next season etc.

 

Definitely one of the weirder choices that the show made was the homosexuality angle of the sparrows.

 

This is something I hate with a passion but actually understand quite well. In the books the Faith obsesses about virginity/innocence instead, which just really doesn't work with Natalie Dormer. The homosexuality angle is a replacement, as show!Loras flirting/sexing all over KL is a replacement of the naughty cousins of Marg (I have an inkling that Marg did lie for one of them at one point in the books).

Edited January 29, 2016 by ambi76

[WindyNights]

Cersei isn't so much sadistic and evil as petty and vicious.

She and Viserys would've made a great couple.

[WindyNights]

@shimpy About Jon Snow and the Weeper, it's ironic how hypocritical he's being when tells Bowen and the rest that they need to put their hatred aside for the good of the realm when he's doing the exact opposite as Lord-Commander. He's in bed with Stannis and can't get past his hatred of the Boltons and the Lannisers to the point where he has to down two cups of alchohol and have his arm twisted by Sam and Aemon to sign a letter declaring their neutrality to the Iron Throne even though it really cost him nothing in addition to helping Stannis as much as possible as well as trying to kidnap "Arya" from the Boltons.

[Lady S.]

You add in Aunt Gemma and cousin Devan and it seems like the Lannisters who weren't directly under Tywin's thumb actually came out pretty decent.  I wonder if Lancel would have been normal if he hadn't attracted Cercei's ... attentions.  

I would disagree that Kevan wasn't under Tywin's thumb. He was Tywin's right-hand man for most of their lives (and as Tywin's right-hand man, surely he bears some culpability for Tywin's crimes), and seemed to love him the most unconditionally of all the siblings (Gerion was the troublemaker, Tygett was jealous of Tywin according to Genna, and Genna spoke truth to Tywin and ended up on his bad side for half a year). IMO he proved to have his head thoroughly up Tywin's ass during Tyrion's trial, saying that Tywin seemed too harsh but that was only because he had to be. I don't care how weak Tytos was or how harsh they thought Tywin had to be to his enemies, it's bullshit to deny his abuse of Tyrion, and the fact that Kevan claimed to have been convinced of Tyrion's guilt by Cersei's trial does not speak too highly of his judgment. Agreed though that Lancel could have been fine if he hadn't been trying to be like his Kingslayer cousin and been given the chance to do so by Cersei, he doesn't strike me as tough enough emotionally to be one of the brutal Lannisters.

[Haleth]

There's a lot of suggestion that Loras didn't die, which actually gladdens my heart.

 

It's my hope too.  I'd like to find out that the reports of his being on death's door is a ploy so Cersei forgets about him, leaving him to join forces with whatever Targ gets to him first.  (Of course I'm talking about book Loras.  Show Loras isn't savvy enough to plot against the Queen and he's not in the same place as book Loras anyway.)  Regardless of any grudge against the Lannisters, the Tyrells are opportunists at heart.    

You never know with Martin, but fake deaths are not uncommon is his story.

[stillshimpy]

Well and I assumed if Martin wasn't trying to hint that Loras us alive, he'd have used the name of the brother in question

[stillshimpy]

Windy Nights, the other thing Jon is consistently doing is the whole. "I have no sisters now!" But I will send Mance Rayder, traitor to the Watch off on a rescue mission for her" thing.

I don't blame Jon at all, but he's pretty constantly taking a hand in the affairs of the realm and acting on behalf of the realm. I think the reason they try to kill him is that the stupid Oath can't allow them to kick him out with a"clearly, oh so clearly, you should not have joined the watch, go home kid, no hard feelings".

[Haleth]

I wonder if any Lord Commander was ever voted out of office, because death is a pretty extreme punishment for seemingly supporting Stannis.

[WindyNights]

"Seemingly" supporting Stannis?

He's completely supporting Stannis.

You know it's interesting to note that Jon doesn't think of Sansa nor Arya as the Queen of the Kingdom in the North. You'd think he'd be an a big advocate of a King/Queen Stark restorationist but not really.

Edited January 29, 2016 by WindyNights

[nksarmi]

I disagree that Jon is

[SeanC]

I disagree that Jon is

He's giving Stannis pretty detailed advice on how to conduct his campaign in the North. He's also independently taking actions to rescue fArya, which are, if not pro-Stannis, at least anti-Bolton.

[WindyNights]

“Lord Snow?” a soft voice said.

He turned to find Clydas standing beneath the broken archway, a parchment in his hand. “From Stannis?” Jon had been hoping for some word from the king. The Night’s Watch took no part, he knew, and it should not matter to him which king emerged triumphant. "Somehow it did." (JON VI)

…Stannis had taken Deepwood Motte, and the mountain clans had joined him. Flint, Norrey, Wull, Liddle, all…. The Night’s Watch was sworn to take no side in the quarrels and conflicts of the realm. Nonetheless, Jon Snow could not help "but feel a certain satisfaction". (JON VII)

@nksarmi Really? Can you honestly say looking at these two quotes that Jon isn't supporting Stannis? Edited January 29, 2016 by WindyNights

[nksarmi]

He's giving Stannis pretty detailed advice on how to conduct his campaign in the North. He's also independently taking actions to rescue fArya, which are, if not pro-Stannis, at least anti-Bolton.

 

There was more to that thought, but I got a phone call and couldn't finish it. And I must have hit the wrong thing and it just posted. I don't write that badly lol.

 

But what I was going to say was that I disagree that Jon is acting in a way that doesn't align with his duty as Night's Watch Commander.  He asked the entire realm for help in defending the Wall.  Who showed up?  Stannis. 

 

He needs to ensure less dead bodies and more fighters for the Wall?  So he lets the wildlings through.

 

Even his support of Stannis winning Winterfell can be seen as supporting the cause for the Wall, because Stannis has promised to continue to support him where no one else will.

 

I think much of what he does really can be defended as being for "his brothers" despite his personal desire for Stannis to win out. 

 

Of course, he is skirting a fine line.  And book five spoiler - not for Shimpy 

He crosses that line when the pink letter comes.  Which is why I think most fans expected to see it - it's pivotal to his story.  The show's version of events is just stupid.

 

ETA: I don't think Jon's inward feelings about things matter in terms of "takes no part."  It's his actions that matter.  And as others have pointed out in other threads - "takes no part" is not part of the NW vow.  As Commander, Jon has one solemn duty - and that's to ensure the Wall stands and the Others don't get through.  He can't do that without men, supplies, arms, etc... If "taking part" ensures him he can carry out his most solemn mission - than he is breaking no vow.

Edited January 30, 2016 by nksarmi

[WindyNights]

Um, no Jon is knowingly breaking his vows.

For instance using Mance to break out "Arya" has no benefit to the realms of men.

[Haleth]

Jon has no love for Stannis and doesn't care if he ends up on the Iron Throne or not. Yes, he made a deal with Stannis allowing him to reside at a Wall castle, but the more men filling the empty castles, the better it is for Westeros. Same for allowing the Wildlings through. The men of the NW aren't seeing the bigger picture. And yes, he sent Mance after the girl on the gray horse, believing her to be Arya, but he did not send Mance to Winterfell or the Boltons.

Edited January 29, 2016 by Haleth

[DigitalCount]

nksarmi:

 

I would actually argue that the thing they kill Jon for is much more part of his duty as LC, because at that point they've received a direct threat to them from an enemy they can't defend against. I do agree that the show needed the Pink Letter to really kick things off, but really there was nothing else he could do in response to it.

[WindyNights]

Jon has no love for Stannis and doesn't care if he ends up on the Iron Throne or not. Yes, he made a deal with Stannis allowing him to reside at a Wall castle, but the more men filling the empty castles, the better it is for Westeros. Same for allowing the Wildings through. The men of the NW aren't seeing the bigger picture. And yes, he sent Mance after the girl on the gray horse, believing her to be Arya, but he did not send Mance to Winterfell or the Boltons.

It doesn't matter whether Arya is in Winterfell or not, he's still intending to take Arya from the Boltons and putting her on a ship to Essos as far away from them as possible.

He does care just check the quotes that I just posted above. And is that why he got Stannis 3,000 extra men? Is that why (not for shimpy)

he warned Stannis of Arnolf Karstark's betrayal in TWOW saving his bacon yet again?

Hell he even constantly thinks of Stannis as King Stannis in word and thought. Compare that to Sam who switches between Lord and King.

Here, GRRM even gave this essay his tamp of approval:

https://meereeneseblot.wordpress.com/2013/10/14/other-wars-part-ii-jons-support-for-stannis/

Don't read that's essay, shimpy, just yet.

Here's further quotes:

[

King Stannis said, “Lord Snow, tell me of Mors Umber.”

The Night’s Watch takes no part, Jon thought, but another voice within him said, Words are not swords. “The elder of the Greatjon’s uncles. Crow-food, they call him…

…”Once Lord Roose has joined his strength to Ramsay’s, they will have you outnumbered five to one… Sire, this is a bold stroke, but the risk—” The Night’s Watch takes no part. Baratheon or Bolton should be the same to me. “If Roose Bolton should catch you beneath his walls with his main strength, it will be the end for all of you.”

…Jon realized that his words were wasted. Stannis would take the Dreadfort or die in the attempt. The Night’s Watch takes no part, a voice said, but another replied, Stannis fights for the realm, the ironmen for thralls and plunder. “Your Grace, I know where you might find more men. Give me the wildlings, and I will gladly tell you where and how.” (JON IV)

[WSmith84]

Wasn't George's approval for the essay on Daenerys there, rather than the thing as a whole? I seem to remember him specifically being linked to Dany on that, so I'm not sure whether it's relevant here. But, which part of the vows is Jon breaking exactly when it comes to Arya? Here they are:

 

Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the fire that burns against the cold, the light that brings the dawn, the horn that wakes the sleepers, the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come.

 

Which of these apply here? The 'Watch takes no part' stuff is tradition, rather than any part of the vows themselves. Not that I really care if Jon breaks them, but still.

 

Personally, I'd rather he just be honest with himself about the fact that he's not being neutral. Because if he had been neutral, things would have been a lot worse for everyone: Stannis would die at the Dreadfort, the Boltons would definitely remain in control of the North, Jon and the Night's Watch would be forced to make a very ugly choice regarding the Royal family at the Wall and when the Others came, only the Night's Watch and whatever wildlings remained would be there to meet them. Stannis is one of the few that appreciates the danger from beyond the Wall. The Boltons, Lannisters and Tyrells wouldnt help them. Not until it was too late for everyone.

[nksarmi]

Digital Count -

I'm not rereading it but to the best of my memory - I think he's crossing the line because he proposes taking men to do something about it when the Lord Commander (and all the men available) needs to be at the Wall - especially to control the situation he created by accepting the wildlings.  That was the moment when I think Jon erred, but I also think it's relevant than unlike the show portrayed it - Jon's stabbing doesn't come from the entire Watch.  It's just a faction that doesn't support him - while others do or at least accept his commands.

 

I don't care if the Lord Commander sends someone who is not part of the Night's Watch with some wildling women to rescue someone he cares about.  I don't see how that breaks any vows. 

[WindyNights]

It was kinda vague but general. Basically, "Adam Feldman got it right"

Digital Count -

I'm not rereading it but to the best of my memory - I think he's crossing the line because he proposes taking men to do something about it when the Lord Commander (and all the men available) needs to be at the Wall - especially to control the situation he created by accepting the wildlings. That was the moment when I think Jon erred, but I also think it's relevant than unlike the show portrayed it - Jon's stabbing doesn't come from the entire Watch. It's just a faction that doesn't support him - while others do or at least accept his commands.

I don't care if the Lord Commander sends someone who is not part of the Night's Watch with some wildling women to rescue someone he cares about. I don't see how that breaks any vows.

Technically, Mance is part of the NW but regardless he was still sent on Jon's orders. If you want to be technical, Jon isn't breaking any literal vows so much as (not for shimpy)

giving the Boltons a casus belli against him which isn't in the interest of the Watch.

So yeah I'm with shimpy when she says that Jon is acting more like Warden of the Far North rather than LC.

(not for shimpy) In ADWD,

Martin starts giving Jon moral dilemmas that are more complicated than “Should I stay or should I go?” 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.Jon’s actions toward Stannis are significant for another reason. Rather than putting the matters of the realm aside to focus on the Watch’s larger purpose and struggle, Jon started indulging his impulse to try and set the world to rights in the North. This impulse is untenable with his role as Lord Commander, and will eventually lead to dire consequences for the Watch.

( Not for shimpy)

When one examines just how far Jon went to make peace with the wildlings, it’s impossible to miss that Jon made no such effort with the Boltons. Instead he took the opposite tack. He sent Mance Rayder on a secret mission to steal Ramsay Bolton’s bride. In the North, rather than being a peacemaker, Jon is a provocateur. By acting in that way, Jon chose to risk everything he else was building. It would have been easy for Martin to design the arc so that Jon had a clear casus belli to justify war on the Boltons. Instead, he did the opposite, arranging the arc so that it’s the Boltons who have a clear casus belli against Jon. This, I believe, is Martin’s fascinating thematic point — that well-meaning and heroic people, for understandable and sympathetic reasons, can choose to risk and endanger a peace, and go down the path of war instead. And that the consequences of this behavior can be quite dire for the lives of the people they are charged to protect. With the Boltons, Jon chose to ignore his own advice and arguments for the necessity of peacemaking. For the wildling peace effort, Jon was willing to argue constantly that it was necessary to make peace with enemies, to let wrongs of the past be forgotten, to join together for the greater good. Yes, the Boltons are incredibly nasty people. But this is the same argument Bowen made against the wildlings, to which Jon responded that even if the wildlings truly were nothing but savage rapers, a peace with them would be necessary to fight the greater threat of the Others

Edited January 30, 2016 by WindyNights

[ImpinAintEasy]

Digital Count -

I'm not rereading it but to the best of my memory - I think he's crossing the line because he proposes taking men to do something about it when the Lord Commander (and all the men available) needs to be at the Wall - especially to control the situation he created by accepting the wildlings.  That was the moment when I think Jon erred, but I also think it's relevant than unlike the show portrayed it - Jon's stabbing doesn't come from the entire Watch.  It's just a faction that doesn't support him - while others do or at least accept his commands.

 

I don't care if the Lord Commander sends someone who is not part of the Night's Watch with some wildling women to rescue someone he cares about.  I don't see how that breaks any vows. 

 

But Mance is/was a part of the NW, and as such, he should have been executed as a deserter, not sent on a mission to rescue the Lord Commander's sister. And even if he wasn't a member of the Watch, arranging to help take the Lord Of Winterfell's bride away from him is meddling in the affairs of the realm. It was a completely reasonable and human decision, and if I was in Jon's position I would have done the same, but technically it is breaking with the rules, as lousy as they are. 

[Alayne Stone]

I tend to agree that most (but certainly not all) of Jon's actions can be defended if one is using very clever lawyer speak as still being somewhat influenced by his position as Lord Commander. It is certainly convenient that the one "king" who chose to help the Watch is the King whose sympathies, if they can be called that, somewhat align with Jon's. I know there's the argument of sheltering and feeding Stannis's men but the fact is Stannis greatly outnumbers the Night's Watch and if he wanted to he could simply take it all for himself. I think Stannis even says this.

 

Stannis is of course clever enough to know that if he appeals to Jon's sympathies it is more likely that he will cooperate with him.

 

Wanting to rescue the grey girl on the horse thinking it's Arya does put him closer to the line but at least the Night's Watch is not taking a direct part in this. And Mance is no longer a member of the Night's Watch. He is a deserter, yes, and I am somewhat biased in the regard that the book (for reasons of plot progression) has acted rashly where the one deserter we have seen on page was concerned ... executing him before even bothering to question him about what had so visibly terrified him to leave. Personal bias here on that one I totally own up to. 

 

Like just about every aspect of this series, the situation is not black and white. There's no doubt Jon needs Stannis to win the battle of the North as he's the only one who has been supporting the Night's Watch. His motivations can conveniently be swept under the umbrella of being for the good of the realm when we know otherwise.

 

This all changes with the Pink Letter. There's nothing grey about it. Jon is breaking his vows here. Also I am trying really hard not to hint at the fact that there is a definitive thing that Jon breaks his vow about which is why I had to hold myself back from saying "Jon's actions up to this point" in that very first sentence I typed. 

 

That being said, the Night's Watch is outdated. It's far easier for the Night's Watch to not take part in the politics of the realm pre Aegon's Conquest when the realm is essentially seven and the most immediate "realm" the Watch would have to contend with would be a Northern realm familiar and sympathetic to the issues the Night's Watch would have to face. I don't think it is a coincidence that their numbers have steadily dwindled over the last three hundred years. They have of course been dwindling before that as well, but their numbers do not seem near as dire until recently. The rest of the seven kingdoms have never really regarded those men as being sentries to anything more than grumpkins and savages north of a wall that already does a pretty good job in keeping them out of the realm's affairs. The only Targaryen King and Queen to ever take an interest had been Jaehaerys and Alysanne and that was only after she flew there herself on her dragon to see the Wall for herself. The Wall and the Night's Watch are just too far removed from the rest of the Kingdoms to be what they once were. Any Lord Commander was going to find a difficult battle with the present state of things. Whether or not they refuse to take part in the seven kingdoms would really be moot were it not for Stannis's intervention at the end of Storm, would it not? Because they would all have been dead at this point in the story.

Edited January 30, 2016 by Alayne Stone

[nksarmi]

But Mance is/was a part of the NW, and as such, he should have been executed as a deserter, not sent on a mission to rescue the Lord Commander's sister. And even if he wasn't a member of the Watch, arranging to help take the Lord Of Winterfell's bride away from him is meddling in the affairs of the realm. It was a completely reasonable and human decision, and if I was in Jon's position I would have done the same, but technically it is breaking with the rules, as lousy as they are. 

 

Yea I get tripped up with the whole he should have executed Mance part.  But if it wasn't for that....I'd still say he was ok.  I mean I think if Benjen was around, he might have gone "looking for volunteers" and come back with Ramsay "by accident."

[nksarmi]

Alayne Stone (not for Shimpy) 

Ack!  I said up until this point because I was trying to indicate that I was only talking about the point in which shimpy had read - not indicating that things might change.  You did a better job. 

 

ETA: Do we think Maester Aemon telling Sam to go to the Citadel regarding Dany being the Prince that was Promised is interfering in the realm of men?  Because supporting her would almost definitely mean supporting a Targ on the Iron Throne right?  I don't think Aemon was betraying his oath in the end - I just think he believes she will be needed to defend the realm. 

 

This is what is so ridiculous about the Night's Watch situation.  For hundreds of years, their job was really just protecting the North from wildling raids.  They could stay "neutral" then and "take no part" as one Targ fought against another or as one kingdom fought another (back when there were seven).  But now they are the last stand against a horde of the undead.  Now to fulfill their duty, they need to support anyone and everyone who will help them.

 

So even if Jon isn't doing his job perfectly - I really do understand his decisions.

Edited January 30, 2016 by nksarmi

[Ashara Payne]

I agree that the idea that the NW shouldn't interfere with Westerosi squabbles and fights is so as to stay focussed on their true role: protecting the realm from whatever might threaten it from the north. Maybe this isn't part of their vows and is just tradition, maybe it's on the implicit understanding that they are left (or helped) to do their job, but if they can't do their job because the crown refuses to help then they really have no other choice than to aid whoever helps them.

The Meereenese blot essays really show how it's a slippery slope for Jon with his decision-making.

BTW does anyone know if there has ever been any explanation for why Gared didn't just go back to Castle Black after the encounter with the Others? It always seemed a gaping plot hole to me, I assume from interviews that he wanted the execution badly as a reason for the expedition where they find the direwolves and didn't fully think through the logic of it or just didn't think it mattered.

[WSmith84]

I think Gared was supposed to be so terrified that his mind literally snapped.

 

You know what is weird? Aemon writes to every King asking for help for the NW, warning them of the rising dead. But we never see if Robb ever received one, and if he did, what his reaction to it was. You'd think the Starks of all people would listen. And you'd think someone at the Wall would have had the sense to ask Jon, half-brother of Robb Stark, to write a letter personally to Robb begging for help and telling him of the danger.

[WindyNights]

I think Gared was supposed to be so terrified that his mind literally snapped.

You know what is weird? Aemon writes to every King asking for help for the NW, warning them of the rising dead. But we never see if Robb ever received one, and if he did, what his reaction to it was. You'd think the Starks of all people would listen. And you'd think someone at the Wall would have had the sense to ask Jon, half-brother of Robb Stark, to write a letter personally to Robb begging for help and telling him of the danger.

Robb was dead at that point as well as constantly on the move when he wasn't.

Also Jon wasn't available during the entire time Robb was campaigning as King:

Like it was Stannis' party that broke the news to Jon that Robb was dead.

[WSmith84]

Robb was dead at that point as well as constantly on the move when he wasn't.

Also Jon wasn't available during the entire time Robb was campaigning as King:

Like it was Stannis' party that broke the news to Jon that Robb was dead.

 

But didn't they send the letter before the Great Ranging? Or am I misremembering?

[Alayne Stone]

nksarmi:

Don't worry. It's a really tough thing to do! I find myself typing up responses and deleting them half the time because I don't want to unintentionally spoil Shimpy but hinting at even the idea that *something* is about to come. I think we've all done a really good job for the most part so no worries. It's definitely tough with Jon though because everything up to the pink letter is a muddled/grey area whereas the pink letter is not so much. And the show never touched on it so she has noooo idea it's coming. :D

[WindyNights]

But didn't they send the letter before the Great Ranging? Or am I misremembering?

No it was sent after the Great Ranging around the time that Jon came back to the Wall.

Remember that the Great Ranging just started out as a huge scouting mission to find out what's happening Beyond the Wall and find Benjen.

[glowbug]

But didn't they send the letter before the Great Ranging? Or am I misremembering?

 

Maybe you're thinking of the letter informing the Night's Watch of Ned's death. The letter came before the Great Ranging.

[Terra Nova]

I searched for some exact quote with a reliable source for this 'Adam Feldman got it right', without so many results. Basically it seems to me that this Martin's quote applies to the conclusions of his essays about Dany in Meereen, which is hardly the stuff of awesomeness (and truly, what any reader would have concluded, barring personal sympathies/lack of them); and some of his own assumptions on the Meereenese knot are quite objectionable, since sometimes he tries to hard to relieve Dany of any culpability (see the 'she did right when she took hostages but then said loudly she wouldn't have killed them'). 

 

What I want to say is just: careful when claiming someone got Martin's seal of approval, he himself is quite vague when asked directly about this or that detail.

Edited January 30, 2016 by Terra Nova

[Ashara Payne]

I think Gared was supposed to be so terrified that his mind literally snapped.

Maybe so, but how on Planetos did he get south of the wall?

[Haleth]

He must have gone through the tunnel at Castle Black then ran away.

 

Between Jon interfering with Nights Watch traditions and Dany interfering with Meereenese (that's a lot of "e"s!) traditions, Martin does not seem to believe that virtue has it's rewards.

[stillshimpy]

I think Gared was meant to have purposefully deserted rather than just running blindly, although he was in a dead panic, the reason he went through whatever gate he did and just kept going was The Others were headed towards The Wall, as far as he knew.  So it wasn't just a case of *Sees Other*Panics Terribly*Begins Running Pell-Mell and Doesn't Stop Until Apprehended*Looks Around and Realizes How Far He Got*Is Astounded*  But rather "Gared sees the stuff of absolute nightmares, what he encounters aren't just Wights, which would be bad enough but shambling dead things might not break a man's sanity, whereas these creatures in clearly magical armor, who give every appearance of being invincible slaughter men while seemingly laughing....and he realizes that they are likely heading South, and where they will hit when they do *decides not to be there* runs with great purpose driven by crazy-making fear.  "Hi Ned!" 

 

But that Gared would have kept going South until he fell off the edge of the Dothraki Ghost Grass.  

 

So on the subject of Jon:  It's not exactly whether or not we can justify his actions and say "Yes, if you are willing to refract the light through this very specialized prism, he is still within the bounds of the Night's Watch" because while interesting, it doesn't matter to the characters within the book.  

 

From the Standpoint of the Men of The Watch -- with their stupid, stupid rules -- how likely are they to see it as stuff totally within the bounds of the Commander of the Night's Watch?  Not likely, basically and that's without knowing a few of the things he's done.  The question, to me, was "Is it easy to see why the Men of the Watch became convinced that Jon was a traitor and needed to die?"  and the answer to that is "Oh hell yes".  

 

The larger question of was he really acting as a Warden of that area or within the rules of the Watch?   I don't think Jon passes muster there.  Mance isn't just the deserter from the Night's Watch who would be executed under the rules of said Night's Watch.  He's the deserter from the Night's Watch who commanded a force that waged war on the Brothers of the Night's Watch and was partly responsible for their decimated numbers.  

So yeah...no.  Not okay to send him on any rescue missions and that's without even considering that Jon is allowing a magical glamour to conceal the fact that Mance was never executed.  <---- so that's a fucking problem on a slew of levels but not the least of which is that it was not Jon calling for Mance's execution and why?  Hmmmm.  Well, why indeed?  Because he could see the Wildling perspective is the short answer on that.  He does have Mance filled with arrows, but Mance should have been meeting blades of execution for desertion. 

 

He doesn't get to do that working strictly within the Night's Watch rules and as Commander, it sets a dangerous fucking precedent, by the way.  But Jon likes and admires Mance and understands his reasons for deserting.  Then when he discovers actual sorcery, he leans into that.  

 

He needs the Wildlings and Stannis's men, he has reasons for doing everything he's doing.  But things like arranging a marriage of allies and walking brides down the aisle?  Yeah, that's Lord or Warden Stuff.   A lot of his actions, if King's Landing were to ever give a shit about what went on at The Wall, would lead to all of the Brothers there being declared traitors to the realm and executed (sheltering Stannis and his men) and to put it succinctly: That's problematic.  

 

We can justify most of Jon's actions, in part because we have access to his thoughts.  Anyone outside the confines of Jon's head and he looks like a worse Traitor than Mance Raydar from where they stand, because Mance, at least, had the decency to actually desert when he went full-on "I will no longer adhere strictly to the rules of this Oath".   So I started talking about this because I can totally see why the men of The Night's Watch decided "He must be killed as a traitor and a deserter who just stayed put." 

 

And my dogs are letting it be known that it is time for the morning walk, but the biggest telltale sign?  Jon's thought process actually contains questioning his own motives and actions.  He repeats the Oath in his head and then adds the "Let the Wildlings through" (paraphrase) on to the end.  He stopped thinking "I have no sisters, for the men of the Watch give up..." blah blah....and now wonders what it would be like to see his sister.  

 

The thing is, Jon kind of knows it too and that last POV with him that I read had him thinking about the blades in the dark, etc.   Jon knows he's breaking his vows and where it might lead, and he decides to do this anyway.   

I don't blame him even a little bit, but Jon Snow knows he's crossed lines he can't uncross and even within the confines of his own head, has given up the pretense that "I don't have sisters" and instead wonders what it will be like to see his sister again.  He knows what his motivations are. 

[Delta1212]

There's a not completely uncommon trope of an order with a singular purpose that they will need to fulfill at some distant point in the future that adopts numerous traditions that are meant to keep them around until that time comes but which ultimately conflict with doing that singular job, and when the time comes have a difficult time giving up those traditions in order to do the job they were formed to do in the first place.

I think Jon has made the transition from "these are the rules that have kept the Watch alive literally for hundreds or even thousands of years" to "this is the mission the Watch actually exists to accomplish, none of the rest of it matters."

But throw in the fact that Jon is still a fairly young boy who is new to real leadership and has a demonstrated weak spot for his family that he's not supposed to have, and it's that much harder for him to convince everyone to get on board with the big changes that he, rightly, sees as necessary for dealing with the Others, because not every such move that he makes is solely in service to that goal. A couple of largely selfish moves on his part can quite easily call all the motives for all the rest of his moves into question, and he's on such thin ice pushing through the truly necessary stuff at this point that he doesn't have room for the missteps that he does make, even if those missteps are understandable given his character and situation.

I also think that combination of radical moves that are truly necessary for the Watch to make in service to its core mission, traditions or no, and the radical moves that come from a more selfish place have a middling effect on the reader as well, because if you look at the pushback from a lot of Watch members on things that the Watch clearly really does need to do and decide that they are wrong and Jon is right, it becomes easy to overlook that not everything that Jon is doing falls squarely into this category.

He's a radical leader at a time that the Watch needs a radical leader, but not every change he is making is a change that is needed for the sake of the Watch. I could even see an argument that nothing he is doing is actually bad for the Watch at this point on its own. At worst he's jeopardizing a political future that isn't going to matter one whit probably within the next couple of months when the Others arrive at the Wall. The Watch doesn't need to stick around for the next hundred or thousand years any longer, they just need to be around in a few months or maybe next year at most, so neutrality is much less critical.

The problem is that breaking neutrality is also not critical, at least, not every case of it that Jon is contemplating or even implementing (as in sending Mance to Winterfell), either, and since the the men of the Night's Watch are already uncomfortable with the changes that Jon can justify with "I don't like it either but it's necessary for the survival of humanity" and at least have a visible point, adding in divergences from tradition that clearly aren't grounded in that purpose and which have an obvious personal motive are going to badly undermine all of his efforts to bring the men around to his point of view. And in that respect, a lot of what Jon is doing is clearly bad for the Watch and for everything he is trying to accomplish to build a defense against the Others.

Edited January 30, 2016 by Delta1212

[Terra Nova]

Something else that is preventing Jon from selling adequately what he's trying to do is his increasing lack of patience with his fellows: he's gone from at least pretending to listen to them to dismissing them openly and mocking them in his thoughts, which is a dangerous change in attitude even if it goes unnoticed by Marsh and the others - well, Septon Cellador is useful as nipples on a breastplate and I find his whining the most insufferable; I for one would have cheered had he slipped on the walkway on the Wall and plunged down -. Jon is gone from trying to persuade them to verbally beat them into obedience and to consider them a nuisance. That's of course a very dangerous road and on re-reads it's truly glaring.

[Delta1212]

Something else that is preventing Jon from selling adequately what he's trying to do is his increasing lack of patience with his fellows: he's gone from at least pretending to listen to them to dismissing them openly and mocking them in his thoughts, which is a dangerous change in attitude even if it goes unnoticed by Marsh and the others - well, Septon Cellador is useful as nipples on a breastplate and I find his whining the most insufferable; I for one would have cheered had he slipped on the walkway on the Wall and plunged down -. Jon is gone from trying to persuade them to verbally beat them into obedience and to consider them a nuisance. That's of course a very dangerous road and on re-reads it's truly glaring.

Which I think speaks to Jon being an intelligent person with strong leadership potential who simply lacks experience and some of the patience and wisdom that tends to go along with that.

Being Jeor Mormont's steward was exactly the right place for Jon and I think he probably would have been the perfect person to lead the Watch through this crisis if he'd had a few years in that position under his belt before everything went south in spectacular fashion. Unfortunately he didn't, and this is the result.

Edited January 30, 2016 by Delta1212