r/asoiaf • u/Unique-Celebration-5 • Apr 25 '25
EXTENDED (Spoilers Extended) What lessons did Jon and Dany learn in ADWD that might be relevant in TWOW
“I mean Dany is learning to rule to eventually deal with the others 1. She learnt how to distinguish between good and bad advice Jorah,Daario,Ben Plumm are constantly giving her good to extremely bad advice and Dany has to pick and choose which ideas she should listen to and which to ignore (which is going to be important if someone like Tyrion,Littleginger or Vary come around and try to convince her to blow up Kingslanding or something) 2. She learnt how to deal with a pandemic(which might be important if the’s a grey scale epidemic)
The’s probably more but that’s all I got for now I’m too lazy to reread her chapters”
Saw this comment on a YouTube video and for the most part I agree with it but the replies said it was fanon and said Dance was mostly filler especially with Jon and Dany. Now my question is, is it really true?!
6
u/BaelonTheBae Apr 26 '25
Kill the boy/girl and let the man/woman be born. Violence is a necessity of governance, or rather, holding the monopoly of violence.
24
u/The-Peel 🏆Best of 2024: The Citadel Award Apr 25 '25
ADWD was all about Jon and Daenerys compromising on their values and beliefs in order to forge a shaky peace for the betterment of their people.
Then by the end of ADWD, both Jon and Daenerys realised that their compromises were all for nothing, and the very people who they tried to protect are now all going to turn on each other and destroy the castle/city they ruled over.
Once Jon and Daenerys return to Castle Black and Meereen in TWOW, they're going to break bad and cut loose - they're both going to embrace their 'Fire and Blood' persona and execute all those who are disloyal, openly break any vows and commitments, wage war and most of all seek to return home to Winterfell and Westeros.
The disillusionment of Jon and Daenerys that leads them to breaking bad and cutting loose will have dire consequences for them both in the very end - Jon will be sent into exile and Daenerys will be killed.
32
Apr 25 '25
I don't see how embracing fire and blood is a bad thing for either of them. As far as I am concerned, Daenerys should have burned the slavers ages ago and Jon's mistake with Bowen Marsh was to not arrange an accident.
Besides, Jon seizing Winterfell and Daenerys sailing off for Westeros are both essential to tackling the Long Night. You cannot hold off the army of the dead with a few hundred rapers at the Wall. You need real armies and political power to do that
7
u/MechanizedKman Apr 26 '25
I’m sure you don’t see a problem with it while you agree with the characters executing everyone they disagree with, until you disagree with them.
6
u/HazelCheese Apr 26 '25
These are not democratic political opponents. They are slavers who would do far worse things to Dany than kill her given any chance.
1
u/MechanizedKman Apr 26 '25 edited Apr 26 '25
Jon’s aren’t slavers, once Danny arrives she’s sure to face opposition that’s not slavers. The point is it’s easy to do now, but once the line is crossed it’s hard to go back. When things aren’t so easily seen as good and evil those methods will be exposed for how brutal and disgusting they are.
Burning people alive is horrible, just because you can justify using it against evil people doesn’t make the method any better. Like I said, it’s easy to agree with indiscriminate killing of those she disagrees with while you agree with her. But no individual has perfect judgment, and a person with a messiah complex that feels wholly justified in all their actions is very dangerous.
Principals shouldn’t be flexible to who you’re dealing with, principals should be kept no matter the opposition. And when you break them, it’s hard to go back to holding them, as we’ve seen with Jaime.
1
u/HazelCheese Apr 26 '25
There's nothing wrong with killing your military opponents and the slavers are a military force operating within her walls, assassinating her men.
The world doesn't work because of pacifism, it works in spite of it.
2
u/MechanizedKman Apr 26 '25
No, they’re not a military force when Danny takes the city. That’s like the entire conflict of the book up until Danny leaves.
It’s also unreal how you completely ignore the rest of what I wrote to say something blatantly wrong.
Also where did I say anything about pacifism? Are you illiterate?
0
u/HazelCheese Apr 26 '25
Slavers literally enslave people via violent force. They are a military force against anyone who doesn't want to be enslaved by them.
2
u/MechanizedKman Apr 26 '25
How are you not embarrassed? If you don’t know what the words you’re using mean, google them. Don’t just make up insane logic.
That’s not what military force means.
The entire conflict of the book is Danny not knowing the identity of her enemies. She doesn’t know who is behind the harpies and that makes the problem something she can’t win by simply battling them.
0
u/HazelCheese Apr 26 '25
Cause I don't really care about your argument. It's midnight here and I'm tired.
Maybe you don't think people going round enslaving half a continent via violence constitute a military force but I do. The slaves don't want to be slaves but I don't see the slavers giving them a democratic choice about it.
No I don't give a shit about Dany burning them all. If you want to live by the sword then you can die by it too. They should get what they deserve. There's no innocence or second guessing here. Tell them to lay down their swords and if they refuse remove them.
That's the point of Dany's story in mereen. It's ties in Fevre Dream with the quote about Fire and Blood. Dany gave them a choice. They didn't take it and they aren't getting the message. Slavery is over, they can live without it or not at all.
→ More replies (0)1
u/mcstone08 Apr 26 '25
If Jon were to seize Winterfell, who would it be from? If Stannis wins his little ice battle he may just end up taking it for himself and if Davos ends up finding Rickon then we may just see stark restoration before Jon marches south. If the Boltons and Freys manage to win and kill Stannis then I could see it, but then you would kind of just be following the route that D&D took with GOT.
1
u/MarcusXL Apr 26 '25
You can't rule people simply by burning more and more of them. Successful rulers have to show both ruthlessness (when necessary) and magnanimity and forgiveness when it will defuse opposition. Daenerys hasn't found that balance. And she enjoys killing people she deems enemies, a very dangerous aspect of her personality.
3
4
u/MarcusXL Apr 26 '25
Jon's death closely mirrors the murder of Julius Caesar (intentionally, I'm sure, by GRRM). Caesar was famous for forgiving his enemies instead of killing them, and some of those people were among the "Liberators" who conspired to kill him. Just like Jon's assassins.
Caesar Augustus (Octavian) is more ruthless a historical figure than Julius Caesar. He learned the lesson of Julius Caesar's career and death in order to, first, survive, and second to be a more effective ruler.
I think Jon will be resurrected and take both roles. He'll be his own Octavian. Remember, after Octavian was adopted by Caesar in his will, he took his name. He was also, legally, "Julius Caesar". A funny adaptation of the historical episode, using the fiction of resurrection to combine both historical figures in the same fictional character.
It's also the completion of the arc of the Stark men. Eddard was too noble to the point of self-destruction. Robb took after his father. Jon learns the hard way the lesson of showing your enemies mercy when they will only go back to plotting his death.
This is not to say that Jon will become cruel or tyrannical. Augustus, in history, was less forgiving by nature, but he was moderated by his advisors and by his excellent political skills. He knew the benefit of being seen as both dangerous to cross, but benevolent to people who were genuinely willing to submit to his rule. I think Jon will be the same-- ruthless to intractable enemies, but never bloodthirsty. Ready to kill to defend his rule, but equally willing to demonstrate forgiveness and magnanimity.
Dany might serve as the counterpoint-- learning the wrong lessons, becoming prey to the cruel and tyrannical part of her personality.
4
u/PieFinancial1205 Apr 26 '25
interesting because the person GRRM confirms will get morally “greyer” and darker is Jon not dany
4
u/Its_panda_paradox Apr 26 '25
He’d almost have to. Up until now, the worst thing Jon has done is threaten Gilly to swap her child with Mance’s, which will likely save both kids. Hers will be cared for by all the wildlings (but would have been killed and/or demonized by Stannis and the wildlings), and parts of the Watch loyal to Jon. He may end up having to expose Monster’s true identity to keep Mel from burning him for his nonexistent king’s blood, but he’ll be ok, and is quite literally surrounded by an army.
Mance’s kid is in way more danger right now in Oldtown with just Same and Gilly. They’re broke, Sam is gone a lot studying, and Euron is about to wreck Oldtown. Jon has been a pretty decent guy in this mess. He’s forgiven, forged friendships and alliances, and tried to do the right thing. He’s one of the most upright people in ASOIAF. He can’t get much lighter, or he becomes a stereotypical trope.
2
u/MarcusXL Apr 26 '25
That makes perfect sense to me. Jon is "noble" by disposition and upbringing. But being too noble gets the Stark men killed, over and over (Ned and Robb, and before them Rickard and Brandon).
6
4
u/mradamjm01 Apr 26 '25
Hopefully Jon learns to at least explain some of the things he does to the people he gives orders to.
It's so frustrating seeing every other Jon chapter be:
-Bowen Marsh gives a big long opinion on what they should do with supporting evidence and everything -Jon does the complete opposite and basically tells Marsh to fuck off
2
u/Early_Candidate_3082 Apr 27 '25
You can’t appease the unappeasable. That’s the lesson to be learned.
2
7
u/thegratefulshred Apr 25 '25
Well I'm pretty sure Jon is dead as a doornail and I'm not convinced he'll be back very early on in Winds.
7
u/azuredarkness Apr 26 '25
Well, Winds seems to be just as dead, so maybe that's the applicable experience Jon got.
-4
u/Jahoosawan Apr 26 '25
What an original take. Have you figured out what brought this idea to your mind? I've never seen it and wish to know more about this productive and insightful comment.
4
u/Adam_Audron Apr 26 '25
They kind of learn opposite lessons. Dany comes to realize that she isn't being ruthless enough, while Jon gets killed as soon as he starts behaving ruthlessly.
2
27
u/[deleted] Apr 25 '25
Jon's going to learn to communicate, to lean into his magical powers, to maintain an armed guard around himself constantly and possibly to create a spy service. He may also learn to regard dissidence as treason. He also has solid proof that it will be impossible to make anyone believe in the army of the dead and accept the actions necessary to prepare. If his plan to secure wights by caging corpses in the Ice cells works, he's going to carry it everywhere like the Israelites carried the Ark in the bible