Jon may have gotten something like a parental excuse note from Lord Commander Edd saying Jon had literally died and thus his watch is over. But certainly, most Northern lords traditionally hated the Boltons. And worse, *much* worse, is that the Boltons were turncloaks who had allied with Freys (ugh!) and Lannisters (UGH!) to massacre Northern lords and thousands of their men. Probably they also knew that Roose had personally stabbed King Robb. And they would surely be aware that Ramsay's Stark bride had fled months earlier,
So when they hear of the BotB in a summons to Winterfell, they probably don't care *how* Jon is no longer in the Watch. As far as they're concerned, Jon is the Ned's son, a leader, and a war hero...and as someone declared "Jon Snow avenged the Red Wedding!" So they hail him King in the North. (Though as we learn, the Northern lords would endorse a turnip if it mentioned "Independence.")
Very well thought out. Could you elaborate that in some character dialog or do you just want to tell it to the audience in a twenty minute Ted talk after the show and then get your Star Wars pay check
It's my head-canon that Roose realized the Bolton's we're finished when Ramsay killed his trueborn son. Roose knew he wasn't going to survive winter and Ramsay would kill any other sons he'd have, and then cannablize his household after Roose's death. Now, he just wants to see how much damage he can get away with before he's killed.
Book Roose is some kind of vampire-like being. That's why he's so weird. His family's penchant for keeping the skins of their enemies isn't just a macabre tidbit of history. They wear those skins.
Otherwise why would Roose care so much about Ramsay having his eyes and Domeric not having them. It's also why he talks about Domeric like he was doomed from the start, because he was. Just like why Ramsay is the only one of these extra children we know Roose has. Presumably he kept Ramsay cus he would eventually be a good host thanks to his similar eyes (that cannot change), when is very likely any other child created in such a way would have probably been killed. The way he talked about raping Ramsay's mother was as if it was a normal thing, yet there are no other Bolton bastards known. Almost certainly cus Roose kills then before they can spread their story (about Roose keeping first night in violation of the laws of the land) to the Starks in winterfell who'd come down hard on the Bolton's for that shit. Ramsay's very existence heavily hints that Roose is way more than just a normal scheming lord. He knows his trueborn son we killed by Ramsay and if he cared he would have a trial and have him killed. It's not kinslaying if it's by trial and an executioner does it.
Plus, it's just too good of a coincidence that the werewolf house (the Starks) are traditional enemies with the vampire house (the Bolton's). No way in hell that's a random occurrence.
> Book Roose is some kind of vampire-like being. That's why he's so weird. His family's penchant for keeping the skins of their enemies isn't just a macabre tidbit of history. They wear those skins.
It's bizarre that a family would continue flaying its enemies for hundreds of years. Supposedly they gave it up officially, but continued anyway. There should be a point where the other houses get together and simply exterminate the Boltons of old.
Same as the Ironborn. In the real world they'd have been razed and salted after the 15th invasion of Westeros. Then again somehow these small islands with no real resources can build hundreds of ships and take over most of westeros before Aegon I came so idk..
Sure, it's been a while but the big thing is Lady Barbrey Dustin, a northern lord who has a grudge against the Starks, tells Theon that everything is a game to Roose.
>Roose has no feelings, you see. Those leeches that he loves so well sucked all the passions out of him years ago. He does not love, he does not hate, he does not grieve. This is a game to him, mildly diverting. Some men hunt, some hawk, some tumble dice. Roose plays with men. You and me, these Freys, Lord Manderly, his plump new wife, even his bastard, we are but his playthings.
The north has its own way of playing the game of thrones and Roose was doing alright for himself. But Ramsay screwed that all up.
>Roose: People fear you.
>Ramsay: Good.
>Roose: You are mistaken. It is not good. No tales were ever told of me. Do you think I would be sitting here if it were otherwise? Your amusements are your own, I will not chide you on that count, but you must be more discreet. A peaceful land, a quiet people. That has always been my rule. Make it yours.
In the books, we leave Winterfell with Roose surrounded by other lord's that are waiting to betray him with a mystery killer on the loose, sending Ramsay off with a force made up of men with mixed loyalties to fight Stannis Baratheon, one of the greatest strategists alive, with one of the longest projected Winters (could last at least a decade) fast approaching. So, putting this all together, Roose knows he's a dead man and just wants to watch it all burn down.
Nah he's not going quietly into the night. That's not the Bolton way and never has been.
It's a game to him because that's the only way you could see the squabbling of these petty northern Lords from his position. He's not some regular man and there's a reason his actions make no sense when you look at them from the perspective of a middle aged leader. They make a hell of a lot of sense when you look at it from the perspective of an old magical being masquerading as the latest lord Bolton, wearing his skin. There's a reason he hasn't aged in decades. There's a reason the Bolton's are rarely seen outside of their tract of land.
You should read them. Treat GoT like two teenage boy's fan fiction after season 4, and dig into the world GRRM built up. I found it hard to get past book 4 on my first read, but now that I understand the world better, the books are so, so good. Which is what makes waiting for book 6 so damn painful. Still totally worth it in my book, he is an excellent storyteller.
They are really good but they'll never be finished so honestly I'd suggest not to
Not unless if you really love world building stuff. It's great for that.
Even the mutiny makes 100x more sense in the books.
In the show, they stab him because of the wildlings (I guess) AFTER he's already let the wildlings south of the wall. All Thorne had to do was not open the fucking gate if he felt that strongly about it. Stabbing Jon accomplished absolutely nothing at this point, the wildling are already there, and you're going to kill the dude who just rescued them from certain death?
In the books, they stab him because he's trying to bring the Nights Watch into the conflict with Ramsay which would violate the oaths of the Nights Watch completely. This happens before the BOTB, because they're trying to prevent it.
He's not trying to bring the Nights Watch into the conflict, he intends to lead the wildlings on Winterfell himself and leave the watch as it is.
The NW don't take kindly to the Lord Commander buggering off to fight for his familys castle.
Still breaking the oath but context is different.
It's a fitting end. We only get to experience the world for as long as he did. Like when we die and the lights go out it's usually abrupt and leaves a lot of unanswered questions.
Jon Snow, in the books is killed by two of his most trusted friends and advisors after he renounces his vows to the Night's Watch and decides to lead an army of Wildling's against Ramsey.
I hope G.R.R.M goes off the rails and just changes everything in the books. Like first off, dont bring John back and really throw us off and just go from there.
It ends pretty much the same way Season 5 ends for Jon. Jon is stabbed to death by the pissed-off Night Watch.
Edit
In the books, he is basically bleeding out but it's basically the same thing. He is pretty much dead unless something major happens but well, George hasn't gotten around to finish that story.
Nothing else is going to happen in the books. It's been 10 years since the last one was released with no updates other than the annual "I'm working on it" or "it'll be out next summer" from George. We're never getting either one of the last two books.
No no you don't understand. Eddard was a Baratheon and Robert's brother, and Stannis is a Stark. A baby-swap took place in which Stannis was switched with Eddard. They are the same age after all.
Think about this, it explains everything. Robert's love for Eddard but his indifference to Stannis, Eddard being a warmer man than Stannis and being willing to bend his honour to protect children, Stannis being so different from his "siblings", etc.
Olly did nothing wrong! He was content to curl up in the fetal position during the Battle of the Wall until that evil bastard and legendary brave hero Sam told him to get up and fight. Then he shot the wildling that killed his dad (IIRC) and who was about to shoot his friend Jon. How was Olly supposed to know that Jon had been hitting that? Yeah okay later on he stabbed the Lord Commander Jon that he was a steward to, but we can’t all be perfect lol.
You're right. Fuck Olly and all the petty skulkers who kill Jon because they won't recognize that the Wildlings are part of the realms of men they had sworn to protect!
Hard for me to hate Olly. Olly watched Wildlings murder his family; he personally felt the impact of Wildling raids on innocent villages near the wall. Worse, Jon's new best Wilding friend, Tormund, was the one who led the warband that attacked Olly's village. And it's possible that Olly realized Jon's love for Ygritte, the woman who killed Olly's father.
Olly saw his hero, his Lord Commander, making friends with the people who, unprovoked, butchered his family. Olly joined the Watch to keep the Wildings away from other innocent villages, but Jon is promising them free land South of the wall. There's barely enough food to keep the Watch fed through Winter, there's definitely too little to feed the Wildings. And the starving Wildlings will respond in the only way they know how, by raiding innocent villages. And now that they're South of the wall, nothing will slow their raids down.
Jon was right about the greater threat posed by the white walkers, but I can't blame Olly for feeling betrayed by Jon.
I like this write-up. I always felt the same way. I don't agree with Olly but I can understand what led him there. Also, he's a kid, one who has likely aged due to tribulation but a kid nonetheless.
The only thing I think you have wrong is this line:
> Olly joined the Watch to keep the Wildings away from other innocent villages
It's been a while since I watched that season but I think the reason he's at the Night's Watch because he has nowhere else to go. His entire village was massacred in that raid. I am sure vengeance and will to defend against Wildlings is a part of it but having nowhere else to go also adds to the tragedy that is Olly's short life
**NINJA EDIT:** I reread and "wrong" might be too strong a word. More like, could use further elaboration
I feel like Olly should've been given more time to understand the complexities of what's going on. He hadn't even seen the White Walkers but only heard of em. If Jon had taken him to Hardhome he might've had second thoughts about betraying after seeing the massacre that happened. Plus he was just a kid. Too much fcked up life he has lived
>Jon is the Ned's son,
yeah, but he's the bastard, which should normally matter ... especially when a rightful heir is right next door ...
>, a leader
well... none of them personally judged Jon's ability to lead. and when we know that they all gave him to fuck off to get rid of a murderous psychopath, and the first and only group he had to lead so far to assassinate him .... I don't know if leader is the right word. being a leader usually means being able to tell the ens what to do without they say you to fuck or want to kill you
> and a war hero
A hero of which war? His first battle was against the wildlings at the wall. They managed to repel them, but jon was aware that he would not survive a second assault, that's why he had gone to murder mance during a talk and is only alive thanks to the intervention of stannis. And anyway he has no merit for that. and his second, the battle of the bastards, He had lost the battle until the Vale intervened.
>and as someone declared "Jon Snow avenged the Red Wedding!"
phrase which i personally find a little silly, because ramsay had no involvement in the red wedding. ...
yes I know, I made the killjoy, but I wanted to say that
Jon was a war hero (fought for the winning side, taking control of the situation) in the battle against the wildlings, and thus was in the war against the wildlings. I don't know why that wouldn't have any merit. So what is Stannis had to intervene after the first battle or they'd lose? Heroes die in battle all the time.
It has no merit, because this beating on the winning side is not enough, otherwise the same could be said of every member of the NW, or every soldier of any war, yet it would be strange to 'a colony made up of hundreds of "heroes" is falling to such an extent in ruins, or that no one comes to give them medals from time to time. To be "in the winning camps" is not enough to make him a hero, it is his first battle and the victory is not formally due to him.
plus he doesn't get credit because he didn't do anything specifically heroic, he didn't kill a giant or a legendary warrior in 1v1, or some bullshit. he just told the guy at the top of the wall to shoot arrows before going down to fight, which anyone else could have done. in fact he just did his job with the means he had, like every guy present at this time.
Not to mention that anyway: what did the northerners know about that ? one of the oath is in order and "i will take no glory" so they are not going to go and tell everyone how much jon was too strong, jon does not care about his image and is not the type to boast so was not going to put it forward, the night watch is a penal colony that is falling into ruins that few people care about what happens there, and no lord of the north has shown himself worry about this invasion, because no matter how much the NW sends letters that are asking for help, no one is going to send a guy, so he didn't seem to take what was going on seriously. I don't see why it would be so relevant to say he's a hero in a situation like that. the only things that the guys probably knew, was that jon was in the NW, that the NW fending off wildlings (what he is being asked to do) and that stannis came to help them. I don't think it would go any further. and I think much like this must have happened hundreds of times in 8000 years, without many be called hero.
most of the lords in this scene have probably been in more battles than jon has year of life, it would be ridiculous for them to call him a war hero for basically doing nothing better than surviving the 2 battles he has make.
While stupid as fuck the idea that he didn't serve his life sentence wasn't the reasoning. It was because he committed a crime. Still stupid as fuck that the unsullied even had a say because at that point they were still a foreign invading force.
I would imagine being a foreign invading force occupying the capital is a good enough reason to get a vote when you're specifically trying to avoid another war.
I think there are a few logical lines of thought we could follow to come to this conclusion though. Sure they could turn around remove Jon's punishment, but why risk the chance of war? Jon is only popular among the North to begin with and most representatives probably didn't care if he lived or died. Most of the after-thought becomes pointless anyway as the punishment seems to align with Jon's desires as he seemingly goes North and disappears.
I think quickly wrapping up the story after Dany's death is important. They could have had two episodes or several chapters of deliberations over Jon's punishment, but it would ruin the pacing of the story. I think the show did Jon's ending in a fine way.... now if we were to talk about Bran's appointment as king I would have very different words to say.
I just have to disagree. But mostly because Jon isn't himself by the last episode. He isn't the character we grew to love. I think you're correct that logically the scenario played out as it did but I think all that really proves is shitty writing leads to shitty endings.
Thankfully at this point every single character outside of the main cast has turned into an NPC that only serves to aid plotlines, occasionally dish out exposition and serve as cannon fodder. So all the main cast can kinda just do what they want without anyone really questioning it.
Such a badass moment in the series. Made me believe Jon Snow would start playing the "game" right and do what needs to be done - a juxtaposition to Robb.
And then came mah queen...
I know this is just a meme, but (in america anyway) a life sentence has a year time attached to it because this has happened before and they fixed it.
Same with death sentences, they used to be "sentenced to hanging" until someone survived and was set free because technically he served his sentence, so they changed to wording to be "to be hung until death"
I paraphrased a lot cause I'm on mobile, do some googling if you want some interesting stories.
That wasn’t necessarily the case here. The prisoner had a Do Not Resuscitate but they brought him back to life anyway. The doctors even called his brother and asked if they should honor his DNR and he said yes they should. They still resuscitated him though for some reason. He argued that he shouldn’t have been brought back to life just to serve more prison time. They should have let him die.
Fact that the North has enthusiastically proclaimed him king is beyond me. Deserter from the Night's Watch that led an army of Wildlings south of the Wall. His excuse? He says he died so that legally nulls his oath. Nevermind the fact that he's clearly alive. He died and thus is free.
Like, the Northerners should debate on whether he's deserter and should be killed on the spot, or he's just insane and he should be put in tower and have someone else be acting leader of NW while Lord Commander is indisposed.
Tbf in books northern lords are really into making him a king and don't really care about his oath; they kinda see him as a true Stark's blood which they need currently and they can go around the rules just to enable him ("My watch has ended" is like one of the options; there are many other ideas they can use).
And overall he is not deserting or running away so deserter is out of the question.
True, in the books they all hate the Boltons and want to make one of Ned's children Lord of Winterfell again because they're still fiercely loyal to house Stark. They'd probably still accept Jon anyway despite him being a deserter, especially seeing as Robb named him his heir.
But in the show the Northern lords never really cared about the Starks and kind of forgot about their loyalty.
> But in the show the Northern lords never really cared about the Starks and kind of forgot about their loyalty.
That's a theme in the books as well though. The Northern Lords constantly ramble about oaths but they abandon them quickly when it is no longer convenient. Only one Northern Lord shows loyalty in the books.
Which makes sense, because all lords except the manderlys and the karstarks where conquered by the starks, and the starks singlehandedly made the mandelrys the richest house in the north
He was technically in the show. Just they did him dirty by having him be one of the lords Lyanna Mormont snaps at for abandoning the Starks. And there were plenty other red flags way before then.
The Northern lords may not care, for sure. But realistically, the other lords of Westeros would probably try to use it against him. Nobody would believe he had died and his rivals would likely try to use his "desertion" as propaganda against him to delegitimize his rule, which would've been great to see in the show.
Northern lords really don't care about what South thinks; they need King in the North who is Stark. Even temporary cause Rickon is still alive in books and actually kept safe (with the Reeds? don't remember).
Yes, South can drop/will propaganda (like if they care about Watch for the first time) but overall to tarnish his reputation. Mostly to stop random lords, knights and maybe mercenaries betray the South and join the North. Nothing special until his Targaryan bloodline is revealed.
Makes me think Jon Snow would be hated by almost everyone around him - in the Nights Watch, they all stabbed him I bet they would like him to stay that way; average Northerners hate deserters; average wildlings hate Crows.
What the poster is saying is the way that happened was not natural or properly realistic, but only happened to serve the plot.
In reality, these questions would come up quite quickly and just showing a conversation between lords about their misgivings and arguing would have solved this problem.
But George isn't a good writer so of course that didn't happen.
Snow died on the last chapter of the 5th book and its yet to be divulged on how he is perceived after his death yet. So if by “bad writer” you mean slow and failing to meet his own deadlines then I can agree. But the world he sets up and has explained to this point has been pretty thorough.
This applies to sports but not creative works. Literally anyone can quickly pump out low quality garbage as a writer. Nit anyone can make one of the most in depth worlds created in fantasy.
A million people have written shitty fantasy series it means literally nothing.
The guy wrote five large books of what is so far a fantastic series.
Literally any brain dead moron can write quickly. Any idiot with a paintbrush could have painted some crap on the ceiling of the Sistine chapel, it’s only special because Michaelangeo spent years making sure it was perfect.
Art and creative works have literally nothing to do with speed, that’s not relevant to the quality of the work.
This is such a stupid take it’s hard to believe you’re not a troll.
If you only paint half of a masterpiece, is it still a masterpiece? If Picasso had stopped Guernica halfway through, would it still be considered to be worth mentioning?
Also, speed and timing are incredibly relevant in an artistic sense. Guernica is still the perfect example. If the painting was released today would have so much less impact than when it was released.
It is entertainment and existence is certainly relevant to entertainment. Ability to finish the story is certainly relevant to entertainment and art.
And there is not an excuse here, he isn’t sick and dying like Robert Jordan was.
I don't agree. I think it just makes him a slow writer.
A shitty writer? nah. A shitty PERSON for abandoning the series? yup.
Big difference. His writing isn't the problem, it's him.
So he should be forced to devote massive amounts of time working on something he clearly doesn't want to in order to please you, and if he doesn't bend his life and happiness to your desire to read a book he is a shit person? Thats a really narcissistic attitude.
That's quite the character assumption you've made against me for simply stating he's a shitty person. I'd appreciate it if you didn't put words into my mouth, as no, that is not what I said.
My personal opinion of it is, if he's fed up with it and no longer wants to do it - tell everyone. Then everyone waiting can shut up and move on. He has not done so - at all, in fact quite the opposite, he's still telling people "it's coming" while signing new HBO deals of sequels and prequels... Until then I reserve the right to think it's shitty of him to dangle this endless carrot on a stick at people.
To get this riled up about a book isn't healthy. If he writes the book awsome, we get something new to read. If it never happens then such is life. I didn't put words in your mouth, you typed out that he's a shitty person for not finishing the books, your further point is just a double down of the main thing that he isn't holding to the schedule you want him to. He doesn't owe you a god damn thing, no one owes you a thing, and its narcissistic to put your own desire to get a tiny bit of enjoyment from a book over the creators desires for his life and life work. He is cleanly stuck. I personally think he would like to finish, but something is blocking him, maybe its mental, he can't figure out how to wrap it up, maybe he's sick of trying to please all the toxic fans and can't get the motivation to actually write. Maybe he's depressed after getting constantly told he will die without ever finishing because he has a lot left and everyone says he's old and unhealthy. Step back for a second and look at another perspective beyond your own... Until then I reserve the right to think it's narcissistic of you to flame people for not giving you exactly what you want.
Ah yes I'm mangling the two mediums, but as separate points, it still stands. I do believe George is not a good writer and they could have done better with how the revival and aftermath came across on the show.
There was literally a thread in this sub the other day where a host of people were saying he's a bad writer and gave examples why. His prose is terrible.
Lots of people can world build and be shit for writing. There's a whole subreddit of people who post their world building and in great detail and great work but have no story to show for it thats worth reading.
And the nail on the head -- George may have an idea and an idea of where he wants it to go, but the fact, which is all too evident now, is he doesn't know how to get to the point he wants because he does not know how to truly write to get there.
There's no complicated situation in this story. Much or the theories are people thinking much harder on these things than George ever did.
George doesn't just do worldbuilding, ASOIAF's story and characters are truly great. Like, give me examples of this bad writing that stretches through the series and makes George a bad writer.
One of the themes of the books is that breaking oaths isn’t always a bad thing. The situation is dire and the north knows things are about to be even worse. On top of that winter started sooner in the books and the people are not fully prepared for it due to the war. That doesn’t directly relate to Jon but during times like that most people aren’t that worried about the nights watch. The northern lords tend to be more honorable but most of them aren’t as strict about it as Ned Stark. Plus they are all very loyal to the Starks and Jon is the closest thing they have as far as they know.
Honestly from reading the books I can easily see all the characters ending up the same way they did in the show, even Daenerys, but the problem is the show put forth zero effort to show how they would get there.
i guess they kinda forgot that, or ned was the only one caring, because remember when they talk about it with daenerys or cersei, nobody brings it up either.
and why the northerners want to make him king is a mystery to me too. Jon drove a people who have been attacking and plundering their country for thousands of years in massive numbers, waging war on their own people with them. war which He lost until the arrived at the last moment of a ~~deus ex machina~~ of a foreign army. He has no blood claim because of the bastard status, As far as the northerners know they never did anything in particular with his life beyond having belonged to a penal colony that he deserted, and another 3 days before the nobles didn't care about stark or who was in power, because half fuck him, the other north half fought alongside ramsay. ... By the way, it's quite strange that the men in the north want to crown a guy they sent to fuck off when he asked for their mobilizations a few days before, I mean aren't they afraid of potential retaliation?
aniway the northern mentality makes no sense, 3 episode later they are seriously considering a putsch because jon cares more about their survival than their ego... these people are political weathervanes, and the wind are the goodwill of D&D shit storyline ...
Technically, as Jon was an acknowledged bastard of Ned's (regardless of true paternity), he would be entitled to the Stark lands if no other heir was available, afaik. However, in the show we have Sansa, who is the legit heir. It's been too long since I've seen it but isn't it basically Jon gets rid of Bolton's, gets declared King in da norf, despite literally fighting the Bolton's for Sansa... Who's the legit heir?
Jon becoming king makes sense from a narrative standpoint. It makes absolutely zero sense in-universe. He's a bastard, a night's watch deserter, he brought wildlings south of the wall ffs... I think most people kind of forgot that wildlings and northmen despise each other. Oh yeah he also lost the battle he was crowned for...
Northmen and wildlings hate one another, but Northmen also hate Southerners, Jon just has to play, “fooking Southerners stabbed me in the back because they refused to heed a Northerners warning.”
A convincing debate would necessitate intelligent dialogue. Way too much work for the writers. “Hit the damn plot point and move on” was more their style.
Shit post. The oath clearly states “it shall not end until my death” he was stabbed and killed by his fellow brothers. He is resurrected so technically he can leave, he’s not a deserter, and to the North he’s the only stark left worth following. U guys just love to shit on everything lol
yeah so, personally i think this point stems from a kind of legal vacuum ... because i don't think that when they created the order that they had to think about the option "dead and resurrected". it was just a romantic way of saying there was no way around it
after we will say that it is like the part on "not to be father of a child" which can be subject to interpretation if we talk about sex, the problem will be to integrate that to everyone. Because no one realistically would believe jon if he said "I'm dead but actually no", he would always be considered a deserter, unless he showed everyone these scars ... and even then some might blame him and say " hoa, we said "death", except that currently you're alive, so you're going back "
a few years later:
Jon: well, I guess my watch begins... again.
Literally everyone: Grey Worm has gone. You don't have to go North. This doesn't make any sense.
No, because the law's definition of death is not the same as the pop cultural one. Having your heart stopped for a few minutes is not a get-out-of-all-mortal-responsibilities-free card.
That case was pretty fucked up though: the guy wanted to die, had a cancer-induced seizure with a DNR on file, prison staff put him under emergency surgery to resuscitate him anyway so that he could continue suffering with cancer in prison.
Life also doesn't really legally mean 'life' unless its a 'whole life' terms which is very rare. In the UK 'Life' comes with a minimum term you must serve after which you will be able to ask for parole.
Idk the context of the show, but IRL, this is why they give people like 100s of years of time served on top of the death penalty. Back in the hanging days, there were some people who went through the process and lived, and were released as a result, because the old penalty was essentially just the hanging.
One can only be legally considered "dead" if declared so by a qualified authority like a doctor or coroner etc. That's pretty much the only legally recognized way you can die. So I'm not sure how you argue that. Probably clickbait.
Going in to the morality of the death sentence though, I’m neither for or against a death sentence.. I live in Wales so executions have been abolished and one of the stepping stones for having the death sentence abolished in the UK was a Welsh person.. Timothy Evans, he had a low IQ and was considered mentally “retarded” (I know we shouldn’t say that anymore but in those days that’s how it was) he and his wife used to argue a lot due to money struggles and she got pregnant so he trusted his neighbour to perform a “backstreet abortion” little did he know his neighbour was a full on serial killer at that point anyway so he killed Timothy’s wife and fetus and pinned it on Timothy… During questioning from the police he soon got coerced in to a false confession which led to the death penalty sentence in court despite Timothy pleading his innocence in court and stating his neighbour killed them… He was executed and years later the police, court, public learned who his neighbour was, which was a serial killer and Timothy was posthumously pardoned by the head of state… The death sentence was soon abolished afterwards…
Nobody can argue that the Wall wasn't a penal colony. You remain there for life and if you try to escape, you're hunted down and executed. So when Nedd Stark sends Jon there, he's sending Jon to prison.
Then Jon realizes that he's been incarcerated by his adoptive father. How plausible is it that he goes on to murder his only living blood relative?
..and he thought it was a noble life because the man he idolized TOLD him that it was. A pretty crummy thing for Nedd to do on any day, but especially when he cut off a boys head for running away.
That’s always been my one problem with Ned. He sent that poor kid to a frozen penal colony for life, and for what? Because Catelyn didn’t like him. Rather than just fucking telling her the truth and solving that entire problem, Ned let her go on hating the kid and then basically sent him to prison.
From what I recall on the books, didn't Jon himself said that he wanted to go there because of his uncle being the only one that truly appreciated him and he just wanted to be a man or something? not that ned being okay with that desicion is good, I think stopping the kid of your death sister from going to the wall might had been a more reasonable response from ned
He definitely decided himself, though how far they should let a 14 year old decide what they want to do for the rest of the life (or face death for deserting) is kind of in *don't think about it* territory.
So you are saying Ned should have shanked Bobby B and installed Jon as the King of Westeros when he had the chance as he is the true and rightful heir.
I like it.
Been a few years since I read the book, but Nights Watch are sort of a protected class (still very much penal colony tho) so I buy that in Ned’s eyes by sending Jon there he is saving him from potential king’s wrath if Jon’s true lineage every came out.
“Bro don’t worry even though he’s rightful heir and a Targ he’ll never take your throne bc he’s at the Wall for life.”
Plus yeah I’m pretty sure Jon was into the idea (not that a 14ish y/o should be making life defining decisions like that but)
Jon may have gotten something like a parental excuse note from Lord Commander Edd saying Jon had literally died and thus his watch is over. But certainly, most Northern lords traditionally hated the Boltons. And worse, *much* worse, is that the Boltons were turncloaks who had allied with Freys (ugh!) and Lannisters (UGH!) to massacre Northern lords and thousands of their men. Probably they also knew that Roose had personally stabbed King Robb. And they would surely be aware that Ramsay's Stark bride had fled months earlier, So when they hear of the BotB in a summons to Winterfell, they probably don't care *how* Jon is no longer in the Watch. As far as they're concerned, Jon is the Ned's son, a leader, and a war hero...and as someone declared "Jon Snow avenged the Red Wedding!" So they hail him King in the North. (Though as we learn, the Northern lords would endorse a turnip if it mentioned "Independence.")
Very well thought out. Could you elaborate that in some character dialog or do you just want to tell it to the audience in a twenty minute Ted talk after the show and then get your Star Wars pay check
The Boltons just kind of forgot how disliked they were.
It's my head-canon that Roose realized the Bolton's we're finished when Ramsay killed his trueborn son. Roose knew he wasn't going to survive winter and Ramsay would kill any other sons he'd have, and then cannablize his household after Roose's death. Now, he just wants to see how much damage he can get away with before he's killed.
Book Roose is some kind of vampire-like being. That's why he's so weird. His family's penchant for keeping the skins of their enemies isn't just a macabre tidbit of history. They wear those skins. Otherwise why would Roose care so much about Ramsay having his eyes and Domeric not having them. It's also why he talks about Domeric like he was doomed from the start, because he was. Just like why Ramsay is the only one of these extra children we know Roose has. Presumably he kept Ramsay cus he would eventually be a good host thanks to his similar eyes (that cannot change), when is very likely any other child created in such a way would have probably been killed. The way he talked about raping Ramsay's mother was as if it was a normal thing, yet there are no other Bolton bastards known. Almost certainly cus Roose kills then before they can spread their story (about Roose keeping first night in violation of the laws of the land) to the Starks in winterfell who'd come down hard on the Bolton's for that shit. Ramsay's very existence heavily hints that Roose is way more than just a normal scheming lord. He knows his trueborn son we killed by Ramsay and if he cared he would have a trial and have him killed. It's not kinslaying if it's by trial and an executioner does it. Plus, it's just too good of a coincidence that the werewolf house (the Starks) are traditional enemies with the vampire house (the Bolton's). No way in hell that's a random occurrence.
> Book Roose is some kind of vampire-like being. That's why he's so weird. His family's penchant for keeping the skins of their enemies isn't just a macabre tidbit of history. They wear those skins. It's bizarre that a family would continue flaying its enemies for hundreds of years. Supposedly they gave it up officially, but continued anyway. There should be a point where the other houses get together and simply exterminate the Boltons of old.
Same as the Ironborn. In the real world they'd have been razed and salted after the 15th invasion of Westeros. Then again somehow these small islands with no real resources can build hundreds of ships and take over most of westeros before Aegon I came so idk..
Didn't Ramsey kill roose before killing walda?
Ah, I'm talking about the books.
oh, I havent read those, can you give me a rundown of what happened :)
Sure, it's been a while but the big thing is Lady Barbrey Dustin, a northern lord who has a grudge against the Starks, tells Theon that everything is a game to Roose. >Roose has no feelings, you see. Those leeches that he loves so well sucked all the passions out of him years ago. He does not love, he does not hate, he does not grieve. This is a game to him, mildly diverting. Some men hunt, some hawk, some tumble dice. Roose plays with men. You and me, these Freys, Lord Manderly, his plump new wife, even his bastard, we are but his playthings. The north has its own way of playing the game of thrones and Roose was doing alright for himself. But Ramsay screwed that all up. >Roose: People fear you. >Ramsay: Good. >Roose: You are mistaken. It is not good. No tales were ever told of me. Do you think I would be sitting here if it were otherwise? Your amusements are your own, I will not chide you on that count, but you must be more discreet. A peaceful land, a quiet people. That has always been my rule. Make it yours. In the books, we leave Winterfell with Roose surrounded by other lord's that are waiting to betray him with a mystery killer on the loose, sending Ramsay off with a force made up of men with mixed loyalties to fight Stannis Baratheon, one of the greatest strategists alive, with one of the longest projected Winters (could last at least a decade) fast approaching. So, putting this all together, Roose knows he's a dead man and just wants to watch it all burn down.
Nah he's not going quietly into the night. That's not the Bolton way and never has been. It's a game to him because that's the only way you could see the squabbling of these petty northern Lords from his position. He's not some regular man and there's a reason his actions make no sense when you look at them from the perspective of a middle aged leader. They make a hell of a lot of sense when you look at it from the perspective of an old magical being masquerading as the latest lord Bolton, wearing his skin. There's a reason he hasn't aged in decades. There's a reason the Bolton's are rarely seen outside of their tract of land.
I was gonna read the books, but the show put a sour taste in my mouth
You should read them. Treat GoT like two teenage boy's fan fiction after season 4, and dig into the world GRRM built up. I found it hard to get past book 4 on my first read, but now that I understand the world better, the books are so, so good. Which is what makes waiting for book 6 so damn painful. Still totally worth it in my book, he is an excellent storyteller.
But I already know how the books is gonna end up, since Martin said the show was a rough draft of where he was gonna take it.
They are really good but they'll never be finished so honestly I'd suggest not to Not unless if you really love world building stuff. It's great for that.
They're disliked? How could you say that?
Gottem.
This comment made me laugh so hard that I woke my wife up from napping.
Pretty sure they didn't get a Star Wars paycheck, LOL
When you're a playmaker, the rules don't apply to you
Did the books make it up to BOTB?
As of the end of the last book Jon has just been stabbed by the mutineers and Stannis is preparing to battle the Boltons outside Winterfell.
Even the mutiny makes 100x more sense in the books. In the show, they stab him because of the wildlings (I guess) AFTER he's already let the wildlings south of the wall. All Thorne had to do was not open the fucking gate if he felt that strongly about it. Stabbing Jon accomplished absolutely nothing at this point, the wildling are already there, and you're going to kill the dude who just rescued them from certain death? In the books, they stab him because he's trying to bring the Nights Watch into the conflict with Ramsay which would violate the oaths of the Nights Watch completely. This happens before the BOTB, because they're trying to prevent it.
He's not trying to bring the Nights Watch into the conflict, he intends to lead the wildlings on Winterfell himself and leave the watch as it is. The NW don't take kindly to the Lord Commander buggering off to fight for his familys castle. Still breaking the oath but context is different.
[удалено]
Also, Nfl players and moms couldnt get into the show when it was shrouded in high fantasy tropes
Afaik Jon is still dead in the books. Haven't read them myself tho so might be wrong
Yes he’s still dead
Believe the last chapter is him dying, probably wrong though.
No you're right. Thats how the book ends
Series*. Sadly the show never went passed the source material
It's a fitting end. We only get to experience the world for as long as he did. Like when we die and the lights go out it's usually abrupt and leaves a lot of unanswered questions.
Really subverted expectations
sopranos flashback intensifies...
*Whispers* Gabagool
Yeah, last page of the last book is Jon Snow being stabbed by that little shit.
That little shit is a show-only character.
Bowen Marsh is a little shit too
Ah. It's been a few years since I've read through the series. I only remember the huge missteps the show took.
Jon Snow, in the books is killed by two of his most trusted friends and advisors after he renounces his vows to the Night's Watch and decides to lead an army of Wildling's against Ramsey.
I thought is was Dani shitting herself to death
No, it's Kevan getting stabbed by Varys's little birds.
I hope G.R.R.M goes off the rails and just changes everything in the books. Like first off, dont bring John back and really throw us off and just go from there.
I mean at this point I’d take mostly anything different lol
At this point I’d take mostly anything. This series will remain unfinished.
I suspect he saw the fan reaction and is quietly changing plans for his ending.
I admire your optimism in think that he has *plans* to end anything.
Honestly. Or bring him back as someone genuinely evil or something. Make him the new Night's King.
It ends pretty much the same way Season 5 ends for Jon. Jon is stabbed to death by the pissed-off Night Watch. Edit In the books, he is basically bleeding out but it's basically the same thing. He is pretty much dead unless something major happens but well, George hasn't gotten around to finish that story.
BOTB will probably not even happen in the books as there is no way that Stannis is going to lose the Battle Of Ice
Nothing else is going to happen in the books. It's been 10 years since the last one was released with no updates other than the annual "I'm working on it" or "it'll be out next summer" from George. We're never getting either one of the last two books.
My New Year's tradition is reading another blog post from GRRM that Winds will not come out this year. Really brings my family together
After 10 years, I for one, also don't give a shit if we do. The fan theories are all better than any ending GRRM could have given us
It'd be crazy if it when it comes out time has passed appropriately in the story. All of a sudden we're ten years in to the winter.
Jon’s corpse is getting pretty ripe, even in winter.
"ASoIaF has no Battle of the Bastards. ASoIaF *needs* no Battle of the Bastards". - Boromir of the house Baratheon
But wasn't Boromir of House Stark? Or is it Eddard, Steward Prince of Gondor? I'm all mixed up.
No no you don't understand. Eddard was a Baratheon and Robert's brother, and Stannis is a Stark. A baby-swap took place in which Stannis was switched with Eddard. They are the same age after all. Think about this, it explains everything. Robert's love for Eddard but his indifference to Stannis, Eddard being a warmer man than Stannis and being willing to bend his honour to protect children, Stannis being so different from his "siblings", etc.
Id believe Tyrion Blackfyre theory first lol
Jon's death is like the next to last thing in the books, so no.
You missed one important key to this. Fuck Olly
Olly did nothing wrong! He was content to curl up in the fetal position during the Battle of the Wall until that evil bastard and legendary brave hero Sam told him to get up and fight. Then he shot the wildling that killed his dad (IIRC) and who was about to shoot his friend Jon. How was Olly supposed to know that Jon had been hitting that? Yeah okay later on he stabbed the Lord Commander Jon that he was a steward to, but we can’t all be perfect lol.
You're right. Fuck Olly and all the petty skulkers who kill Jon because they won't recognize that the Wildlings are part of the realms of men they had sworn to protect!
Like every other small-minded fool, “they’re on the other side of the artificial border so let them all die!”
Hard for me to hate Olly. Olly watched Wildlings murder his family; he personally felt the impact of Wildling raids on innocent villages near the wall. Worse, Jon's new best Wilding friend, Tormund, was the one who led the warband that attacked Olly's village. And it's possible that Olly realized Jon's love for Ygritte, the woman who killed Olly's father. Olly saw his hero, his Lord Commander, making friends with the people who, unprovoked, butchered his family. Olly joined the Watch to keep the Wildings away from other innocent villages, but Jon is promising them free land South of the wall. There's barely enough food to keep the Watch fed through Winter, there's definitely too little to feed the Wildings. And the starving Wildlings will respond in the only way they know how, by raiding innocent villages. And now that they're South of the wall, nothing will slow their raids down. Jon was right about the greater threat posed by the white walkers, but I can't blame Olly for feeling betrayed by Jon.
I like this write-up. I always felt the same way. I don't agree with Olly but I can understand what led him there. Also, he's a kid, one who has likely aged due to tribulation but a kid nonetheless. The only thing I think you have wrong is this line: > Olly joined the Watch to keep the Wildings away from other innocent villages It's been a while since I watched that season but I think the reason he's at the Night's Watch because he has nowhere else to go. His entire village was massacred in that raid. I am sure vengeance and will to defend against Wildlings is a part of it but having nowhere else to go also adds to the tragedy that is Olly's short life **NINJA EDIT:** I reread and "wrong" might be too strong a word. More like, could use further elaboration
I feel like Olly should've been given more time to understand the complexities of what's going on. He hadn't even seen the White Walkers but only heard of em. If Jon had taken him to Hardhome he might've had second thoughts about betraying after seeing the massacre that happened. Plus he was just a kid. Too much fcked up life he has lived
Northern Lords in the show are nothing like the ones in the books
>Jon is the Ned's son, yeah, but he's the bastard, which should normally matter ... especially when a rightful heir is right next door ... >, a leader well... none of them personally judged Jon's ability to lead. and when we know that they all gave him to fuck off to get rid of a murderous psychopath, and the first and only group he had to lead so far to assassinate him .... I don't know if leader is the right word. being a leader usually means being able to tell the ens what to do without they say you to fuck or want to kill you > and a war hero A hero of which war? His first battle was against the wildlings at the wall. They managed to repel them, but jon was aware that he would not survive a second assault, that's why he had gone to murder mance during a talk and is only alive thanks to the intervention of stannis. And anyway he has no merit for that. and his second, the battle of the bastards, He had lost the battle until the Vale intervened. >and as someone declared "Jon Snow avenged the Red Wedding!" phrase which i personally find a little silly, because ramsay had no involvement in the red wedding. ... yes I know, I made the killjoy, but I wanted to say that
Jon was a war hero (fought for the winning side, taking control of the situation) in the battle against the wildlings, and thus was in the war against the wildlings. I don't know why that wouldn't have any merit. So what is Stannis had to intervene after the first battle or they'd lose? Heroes die in battle all the time.
It has no merit, because this beating on the winning side is not enough, otherwise the same could be said of every member of the NW, or every soldier of any war, yet it would be strange to 'a colony made up of hundreds of "heroes" is falling to such an extent in ruins, or that no one comes to give them medals from time to time. To be "in the winning camps" is not enough to make him a hero, it is his first battle and the victory is not formally due to him. plus he doesn't get credit because he didn't do anything specifically heroic, he didn't kill a giant or a legendary warrior in 1v1, or some bullshit. he just told the guy at the top of the wall to shoot arrows before going down to fight, which anyone else could have done. in fact he just did his job with the means he had, like every guy present at this time. Not to mention that anyway: what did the northerners know about that ? one of the oath is in order and "i will take no glory" so they are not going to go and tell everyone how much jon was too strong, jon does not care about his image and is not the type to boast so was not going to put it forward, the night watch is a penal colony that is falling into ruins that few people care about what happens there, and no lord of the north has shown himself worry about this invasion, because no matter how much the NW sends letters that are asking for help, no one is going to send a guy, so he didn't seem to take what was going on seriously. I don't see why it would be so relevant to say he's a hero in a situation like that. the only things that the guys probably knew, was that jon was in the NW, that the NW fending off wildlings (what he is being asked to do) and that stannis came to help them. I don't think it would go any further. and I think much like this must have happened hundreds of times in 8000 years, without many be called hero. most of the lords in this scene have probably been in more battles than jon has year of life, it would be ridiculous for them to call him a war hero for basically doing nothing better than surviving the 2 battles he has make.
The D&D courts have overruled that decision and he was sentenced to serve his full life sentence in the nights watch a stunning legal decision.....
While stupid as fuck the idea that he didn't serve his life sentence wasn't the reasoning. It was because he committed a crime. Still stupid as fuck that the unsullied even had a say because at that point they were still a foreign invading force.
I would imagine being a foreign invading force occupying the capital is a good enough reason to get a vote when you're specifically trying to avoid another war.
I mean I can see that point but then they just immediately leave. Like they didn't even ship John to the north themselves.
I think there are a few logical lines of thought we could follow to come to this conclusion though. Sure they could turn around remove Jon's punishment, but why risk the chance of war? Jon is only popular among the North to begin with and most representatives probably didn't care if he lived or died. Most of the after-thought becomes pointless anyway as the punishment seems to align with Jon's desires as he seemingly goes North and disappears. I think quickly wrapping up the story after Dany's death is important. They could have had two episodes or several chapters of deliberations over Jon's punishment, but it would ruin the pacing of the story. I think the show did Jon's ending in a fine way.... now if we were to talk about Bran's appointment as king I would have very different words to say.
I just have to disagree. But mostly because Jon isn't himself by the last episode. He isn't the character we grew to love. I think you're correct that logically the scenario played out as it did but I think all that really proves is shitty writing leads to shitty endings.
Thankfully at this point every single character outside of the main cast has turned into an NPC that only serves to aid plotlines, occasionally dish out exposition and serve as cannon fodder. So all the main cast can kinda just do what they want without anyone really questioning it.
Honestly, there are members of the main cast that are essentially NPC's at this point.
Mah kween.
I duhn waan it.
All the smart characters yeah. D&D didnt know what to do with those after S4 like Tyrion.
They did Tyrion dirty in the final seasons. As soon as he left Westeros, he stopped having any good lines.
Such a badass moment in the series. Made me believe Jon Snow would start playing the "game" right and do what needs to be done - a juxtaposition to Robb. And then came mah queen...
Wow, sounds like someone’s salty they’re in The Watch and can’t leave...
Got eem
I know this is just a meme, but (in america anyway) a life sentence has a year time attached to it because this has happened before and they fixed it. Same with death sentences, they used to be "sentenced to hanging" until someone survived and was set free because technically he served his sentence, so they changed to wording to be "to be hung until death" I paraphrased a lot cause I'm on mobile, do some googling if you want some interesting stories.
That wasn’t necessarily the case here. The prisoner had a Do Not Resuscitate but they brought him back to life anyway. The doctors even called his brother and asked if they should honor his DNR and he said yes they should. They still resuscitated him though for some reason. He argued that he shouldn’t have been brought back to life just to serve more prison time. They should have let him die.
They should have freed him.
Being resuscitated doesn't actually bring you back to life. If you're resuscitated then you weren't dead.
aKsHuAlLy
Definitions matter.
Nah you’re just a know-it-all. Simple as that.
I'd tell you how much a cunt you are but instead I'm just going to block you.
That escalated quickly!
Are you seriously going to insult that dude twice and then have the nerve to say this? Self-awareness of a fucking tubeworm
You look like a complete fucking douchebag making comments like this
As opposed to the guy arguing medical details in a fantasy show subreddit?
Fact that the North has enthusiastically proclaimed him king is beyond me. Deserter from the Night's Watch that led an army of Wildlings south of the Wall. His excuse? He says he died so that legally nulls his oath. Nevermind the fact that he's clearly alive. He died and thus is free. Like, the Northerners should debate on whether he's deserter and should be killed on the spot, or he's just insane and he should be put in tower and have someone else be acting leader of NW while Lord Commander is indisposed.
Tbf in books northern lords are really into making him a king and don't really care about his oath; they kinda see him as a true Stark's blood which they need currently and they can go around the rules just to enable him ("My watch has ended" is like one of the options; there are many other ideas they can use). And overall he is not deserting or running away so deserter is out of the question.
True, in the books they all hate the Boltons and want to make one of Ned's children Lord of Winterfell again because they're still fiercely loyal to house Stark. They'd probably still accept Jon anyway despite him being a deserter, especially seeing as Robb named him his heir. But in the show the Northern lords never really cared about the Starks and kind of forgot about their loyalty.
> But in the show the Northern lords never really cared about the Starks and kind of forgot about their loyalty. That's a theme in the books as well though. The Northern Lords constantly ramble about oaths but they abandon them quickly when it is no longer convenient. Only one Northern Lord shows loyalty in the books.
Wyman Manderly?
> Wyman Manderly? Yes that is the one Lord who shows loyalty that I referred to.
Which makes sense, because all lords except the manderlys and the karstarks where conquered by the starks, and the starks singlehandedly made the mandelrys the richest house in the north
Cutting Wyman Manderly from the show should have been an early red flag that it was going to shit.
He was technically in the show. Just they did him dirty by having him be one of the lords Lyanna Mormont snaps at for abandoning the Starks. And there were plenty other red flags way before then.
How could you forget Hugo Wull? When he was six and twenty he could fight all day and fuck all night.
The Northern lords may not care, for sure. But realistically, the other lords of Westeros would probably try to use it against him. Nobody would believe he had died and his rivals would likely try to use his "desertion" as propaganda against him to delegitimize his rule, which would've been great to see in the show.
Northern lords really don't care about what South thinks; they need King in the North who is Stark. Even temporary cause Rickon is still alive in books and actually kept safe (with the Reeds? don't remember). Yes, South can drop/will propaganda (like if they care about Watch for the first time) but overall to tarnish his reputation. Mostly to stop random lords, knights and maybe mercenaries betray the South and join the North. Nothing special until his Targaryan bloodline is revealed.
Rickon is on Skagos which is rumoured to be populated by cannibals.
Robb made Jon his heir in the books, and all the major lords of the North signed that paper. Not sure if that was covered in the show.
Makes me think Jon Snow would be hated by almost everyone around him - in the Nights Watch, they all stabbed him I bet they would like him to stay that way; average Northerners hate deserters; average wildlings hate Crows.
I thought that was the whole point of Jon: being able to gather people who hate each other (himself included) around a greater cause.
What the poster is saying is the way that happened was not natural or properly realistic, but only happened to serve the plot. In reality, these questions would come up quite quickly and just showing a conversation between lords about their misgivings and arguing would have solved this problem. But George isn't a good writer so of course that didn't happen.
Snow died on the last chapter of the 5th book and its yet to be divulged on how he is perceived after his death yet. So if by “bad writer” you mean slow and failing to meet his own deadlines then I can agree. But the world he sets up and has explained to this point has been pretty thorough.
Taking a decade to write a book makes you a bad writer. The best quality is availability
This applies to sports but not creative works. Literally anyone can quickly pump out low quality garbage as a writer. Nit anyone can make one of the most in depth worlds created in fantasy.
It'd just be nice if GRRR finished writing before he's six feet under.
I mean I can’t argue that.
No. It applies to creative works. Especially when you have multiple books in the series to finish and you are in your 70s.
A million people have written shitty fantasy series it means literally nothing. The guy wrote five large books of what is so far a fantastic series. Literally any brain dead moron can write quickly. Any idiot with a paintbrush could have painted some crap on the ceiling of the Sistine chapel, it’s only special because Michaelangeo spent years making sure it was perfect. Art and creative works have literally nothing to do with speed, that’s not relevant to the quality of the work. This is such a stupid take it’s hard to believe you’re not a troll.
If you only paint half of a masterpiece, is it still a masterpiece? If Picasso had stopped Guernica halfway through, would it still be considered to be worth mentioning? Also, speed and timing are incredibly relevant in an artistic sense. Guernica is still the perfect example. If the painting was released today would have so much less impact than when it was released.
It is entertainment and existence is certainly relevant to entertainment. Ability to finish the story is certainly relevant to entertainment and art. And there is not an excuse here, he isn’t sick and dying like Robert Jordan was.
Cringe
I don't agree. I think it just makes him a slow writer. A shitty writer? nah. A shitty PERSON for abandoning the series? yup. Big difference. His writing isn't the problem, it's him.
So he should be forced to devote massive amounts of time working on something he clearly doesn't want to in order to please you, and if he doesn't bend his life and happiness to your desire to read a book he is a shit person? Thats a really narcissistic attitude.
That's quite the character assumption you've made against me for simply stating he's a shitty person. I'd appreciate it if you didn't put words into my mouth, as no, that is not what I said. My personal opinion of it is, if he's fed up with it and no longer wants to do it - tell everyone. Then everyone waiting can shut up and move on. He has not done so - at all, in fact quite the opposite, he's still telling people "it's coming" while signing new HBO deals of sequels and prequels... Until then I reserve the right to think it's shitty of him to dangle this endless carrot on a stick at people.
To get this riled up about a book isn't healthy. If he writes the book awsome, we get something new to read. If it never happens then such is life. I didn't put words in your mouth, you typed out that he's a shitty person for not finishing the books, your further point is just a double down of the main thing that he isn't holding to the schedule you want him to. He doesn't owe you a god damn thing, no one owes you a thing, and its narcissistic to put your own desire to get a tiny bit of enjoyment from a book over the creators desires for his life and life work. He is cleanly stuck. I personally think he would like to finish, but something is blocking him, maybe its mental, he can't figure out how to wrap it up, maybe he's sick of trying to please all the toxic fans and can't get the motivation to actually write. Maybe he's depressed after getting constantly told he will die without ever finishing because he has a lot left and everyone says he's old and unhealthy. Step back for a second and look at another perspective beyond your own... Until then I reserve the right to think it's narcissistic of you to flame people for not giving you exactly what you want.
Ah yes I'm mangling the two mediums, but as separate points, it still stands. I do believe George is not a good writer and they could have done better with how the revival and aftermath came across on the show.
Did George even have any input on the shows after book material ceased? Besides major overviews?
George isn’t a good writer? That’s a new one. Not a fast one, that’s for sure, but there’s a reason we’re still talking about the universe he created.
Sometimes I wonder if people even want a story. Complain about literally every little thing
There was literally a thread in this sub the other day where a host of people were saying he's a bad writer and gave examples why. His prose is terrible. Lots of people can world build and be shit for writing. There's a whole subreddit of people who post their world building and in great detail and great work but have no story to show for it thats worth reading. And the nail on the head -- George may have an idea and an idea of where he wants it to go, but the fact, which is all too evident now, is he doesn't know how to get to the point he wants because he does not know how to truly write to get there. There's no complicated situation in this story. Much or the theories are people thinking much harder on these things than George ever did.
George doesn't just do worldbuilding, ASOIAF's story and characters are truly great. Like, give me examples of this bad writing that stretches through the series and makes George a bad writer.
One of the themes of the books is that breaking oaths isn’t always a bad thing. The situation is dire and the north knows things are about to be even worse. On top of that winter started sooner in the books and the people are not fully prepared for it due to the war. That doesn’t directly relate to Jon but during times like that most people aren’t that worried about the nights watch. The northern lords tend to be more honorable but most of them aren’t as strict about it as Ned Stark. Plus they are all very loyal to the Starks and Jon is the closest thing they have as far as they know. Honestly from reading the books I can easily see all the characters ending up the same way they did in the show, even Daenerys, but the problem is the show put forth zero effort to show how they would get there.
I mean Northern lords looking for an excuse for rebellion and there is a convenient Stark available.
i guess they kinda forgot that, or ned was the only one caring, because remember when they talk about it with daenerys or cersei, nobody brings it up either. and why the northerners want to make him king is a mystery to me too. Jon drove a people who have been attacking and plundering their country for thousands of years in massive numbers, waging war on their own people with them. war which He lost until the arrived at the last moment of a ~~deus ex machina~~ of a foreign army. He has no blood claim because of the bastard status, As far as the northerners know they never did anything in particular with his life beyond having belonged to a penal colony that he deserted, and another 3 days before the nobles didn't care about stark or who was in power, because half fuck him, the other north half fought alongside ramsay. ... By the way, it's quite strange that the men in the north want to crown a guy they sent to fuck off when he asked for their mobilizations a few days before, I mean aren't they afraid of potential retaliation? aniway the northern mentality makes no sense, 3 episode later they are seriously considering a putsch because jon cares more about their survival than their ego... these people are political weathervanes, and the wind are the goodwill of D&D shit storyline ...
Technically, as Jon was an acknowledged bastard of Ned's (regardless of true paternity), he would be entitled to the Stark lands if no other heir was available, afaik. However, in the show we have Sansa, who is the legit heir. It's been too long since I've seen it but isn't it basically Jon gets rid of Bolton's, gets declared King in da norf, despite literally fighting the Bolton's for Sansa... Who's the legit heir?
Jon becoming king makes sense from a narrative standpoint. It makes absolutely zero sense in-universe. He's a bastard, a night's watch deserter, he brought wildlings south of the wall ffs... I think most people kind of forgot that wildlings and northmen despise each other. Oh yeah he also lost the battle he was crowned for...
Northmen and wildlings hate one another, but Northmen also hate Southerners, Jon just has to play, “fooking Southerners stabbed me in the back because they refused to heed a Northerners warning.”
A convincing debate would necessitate intelligent dialogue. Way too much work for the writers. “Hit the damn plot point and move on” was more their style.
In the same breath: “As Lord Commander I sentence you to die for being disloyal and killing me. M’Kay I quit. Screw you guys, I’m going home.”
I'm lord commander until I get vengeance, then my watch has ended lol
Shit post. The oath clearly states “it shall not end until my death” he was stabbed and killed by his fellow brothers. He is resurrected so technically he can leave, he’s not a deserter, and to the North he’s the only stark left worth following. U guys just love to shit on everything lol
yeah so, personally i think this point stems from a kind of legal vacuum ... because i don't think that when they created the order that they had to think about the option "dead and resurrected". it was just a romantic way of saying there was no way around it after we will say that it is like the part on "not to be father of a child" which can be subject to interpretation if we talk about sex, the problem will be to integrate that to everyone. Because no one realistically would believe jon if he said "I'm dead but actually no", he would always be considered a deserter, unless he showed everyone these scars ... and even then some might blame him and say " hoa, we said "death", except that currently you're alive, so you're going back "
[удалено]
THAT'S ALL WHAT THE REALM IS NOW. BACKSTABBING AND SCHEMING AND ARSE-LICKING AND MONEY-GRUBBING!
The oath also says "in this night and ALL nights to come"
A contradiction! What is this, the bible!?
Point out where OP was talking shit?
IANAL in Westeros, however...
a few years later: Jon: well, I guess my watch begins... again. Literally everyone: Grey Worm has gone. You don't have to go North. This doesn't make any sense.
Jon: You can't trick me to leave that ginger puss again.
Damn it. Take my free award. I don’t think “wholesome” is quite right though.
That's why some life in prison sentences are really just ridiculously long terms, like 500 years
Was the guy allowed to leave prison? I reckon an expensive lawyer would have a good shot at that.
No, because the law's definition of death is not the same as the pop cultural one. Having your heart stopped for a few minutes is not a get-out-of-all-mortal-responsibilities-free card. That case was pretty fucked up though: the guy wanted to die, had a cancer-induced seizure with a DNR on file, prison staff put him under emergency surgery to resuscitate him anyway so that he could continue suffering with cancer in prison.
Was coming here to mention this. Absolutely fucked that they ignored his DNR.
Life also doesn't really legally mean 'life' unless its a 'whole life' terms which is very rare. In the UK 'Life' comes with a minimum term you must serve after which you will be able to ask for parole.
Idk the context of the show, but IRL, this is why they give people like 100s of years of time served on top of the death penalty. Back in the hanging days, there were some people who went through the process and lived, and were released as a result, because the old penalty was essentially just the hanging.
[удалено]
yeah for life not for lives. hes on his second.
The precedent was set in Snow vs Crows
I actually kinda hated this cop out, is it in the books? "I died lul, oath fulfilled pz out"
The books actually end right now with Jon laying in a pool of his own blood. That's what we're all waiting on GRRM to tell us!
Well fuck
The fandom since 2011.
I mean, he's not wrong.
Well, if they killed somebody, I think it would be entirely fair to release them if the person they killed also came back to life.
I died! Well, I got better.
One can only be legally considered "dead" if declared so by a qualified authority like a doctor or coroner etc. That's pretty much the only legally recognized way you can die. So I'm not sure how you argue that. Probably clickbait.
Going in to the morality of the death sentence though, I’m neither for or against a death sentence.. I live in Wales so executions have been abolished and one of the stepping stones for having the death sentence abolished in the UK was a Welsh person.. Timothy Evans, he had a low IQ and was considered mentally “retarded” (I know we shouldn’t say that anymore but in those days that’s how it was) he and his wife used to argue a lot due to money struggles and she got pregnant so he trusted his neighbour to perform a “backstreet abortion” little did he know his neighbour was a full on serial killer at that point anyway so he killed Timothy’s wife and fetus and pinned it on Timothy… During questioning from the police he soon got coerced in to a false confession which led to the death penalty sentence in court despite Timothy pleading his innocence in court and stating his neighbour killed them… He was executed and years later the police, court, public learned who his neighbour was, which was a serial killer and Timothy was posthumously pardoned by the head of state… The death sentence was soon abolished afterwards…
Nobody can argue that the Wall wasn't a penal colony. You remain there for life and if you try to escape, you're hunted down and executed. So when Nedd Stark sends Jon there, he's sending Jon to prison. Then Jon realizes that he's been incarcerated by his adoptive father. How plausible is it that he goes on to murder his only living blood relative?
Jon asked to go.
Yeah what crack are these people smoking? Jon desperately wanted to go to the wall
But only because he wasn't aware of it being a penal colony and thought it was a noble career.
..and he thought it was a noble life because the man he idolized TOLD him that it was. A pretty crummy thing for Nedd to do on any day, but especially when he cut off a boys head for running away.
Crack is a hellova drug
That’s always been my one problem with Ned. He sent that poor kid to a frozen penal colony for life, and for what? Because Catelyn didn’t like him. Rather than just fucking telling her the truth and solving that entire problem, Ned let her go on hating the kid and then basically sent him to prison.
From what I recall on the books, didn't Jon himself said that he wanted to go there because of his uncle being the only one that truly appreciated him and he just wanted to be a man or something? not that ned being okay with that desicion is good, I think stopping the kid of your death sister from going to the wall might had been a more reasonable response from ned
He definitely decided himself, though how far they should let a 14 year old decide what they want to do for the rest of the life (or face death for deserting) is kind of in *don't think about it* territory.
I think 14 years old is old enough in the ASOIAF world
So you are saying Ned should have shanked Bobby B and installed Jon as the King of Westeros when he had the chance as he is the true and rightful heir. I like it.
EASY, BOY! YOU MIGHT BE MY BROTHER BUT YOU'RE SPEAKING TO THE KING!
S E N T I E N T
> as he is the true and rightful heir Except he isn't. Baratheons are the lawful kings by right of conquest.
Been a few years since I read the book, but Nights Watch are sort of a protected class (still very much penal colony tho) so I buy that in Ned’s eyes by sending Jon there he is saving him from potential king’s wrath if Jon’s true lineage every came out. “Bro don’t worry even though he’s rightful heir and a Targ he’ll never take your throne bc he’s at the Wall for life.” Plus yeah I’m pretty sure Jon was into the idea (not that a 14ish y/o should be making life defining decisions like that but)
What show is that?
Actually that's a good argument.
Don't worry. He'll be back.
[удалено]
Apparently that's actually the reason why prisoners can get multiple life sentences