He finds out that he is actually the rightful heir to the Throne. And he claims he doesn't care now??? That he wants to remain a bastard and wander the North??? Yeah right
Dragons are more believable than that.
He committed murder. He's a would-be king who's a queenslayer. No-one would want him to rule over them.
Jamie never had to go to the NW.
shareIf Jon had accepted his heritage she never would have killed Dany.
If someone tells you that you are the true King - that you can rule the 7 Kingdoms fairly, you just say - no thanks??? I don't think so - bad writing.
Justified and lawful summary execution, not murder.
share"He committed murder. He's a would-be king who's a queenslayer. No-one would want him to rule over them."
The story they told everyone just as easily could have been, he killed his aunt for trying to usurp his rightful throne. Besides, rightful claims and treason are really just a matter of whose in power.
Why do they need a story? She was one of the worst war criminals in the history of Westeros. She remained in command of the same weapon of mass destruction that she just used to wipe out 100,000+ people and she had announced her intention to continue using it against civilians. Her execution was just and necessary.
shareBut you do remember that in all that time Jon never wanted to be the Iron King or any King of the realm...even when he was proclaimed King of the North by popular opinion.
Finding out he was the so called rightful heir to the Iron Throne didn't change any of that. He still didn't want to be King.
You seem to be saying that Jon could've taken his rightful place and it could've saved him having to kill Daenerys? Well no, he was content to step aside and let her be Queen because he still didn't want to be King and he thought she was the one that would change the world for the better...
He only changed his mind about her after she went genocidal and wiped everyone out...but by then it was a little too late to proclaim himself as rightful King even if he had wanted to.
Not only would that have meant a coup and a nasty war ...Jon wanted to be King even less than he ever had even if his reputation as a Queenslayer had made no difference to the North.
It didn't matter what he wanted - he was the rightful heir to the throne - Jon was known for doing his duty if he liked it or not. He was King of the North - becoming the Iron King was not a big step.
Again - bad writing - we watched these characters for 7 seasons, we knew how they would react to different situations, when they stayed true to their characters.
> It didn't matter what he wanted - he was the rightful heir to the throne -
> Jon was known for doing his duty if he liked it or not.
Yes, but when you’re the rightful heir it’s your RIGHT to become King, not your DUTY. That right has been renounced before, we’ve met a man who did this.
Of course, as we know Jon, he would have seen it as his duty to take the throne IF he hadn’t thought that Daenerys would be a good and just Queen. But that’s what he thought, so he felt there was no need to claim his right. And what did he do when he saw that he was wrong? – He again chose duty over love, as he did before with Ygritte.
Now think about it: Twice, he lost the woman he loved because he fulfilled his duty. And the second time, he even killed her with his own hands. In my opinion, it was in no way out of character (as we’ve seen it in previous seasons) that he was shown as a broken man when Tyrion visited him in his cell.
Moreover, he had supported Daenerys, he bent the knee to her and was part of the attack which lead to the destruction of King’s Landing. He was totally wrong on her. Although it wasn’t even mentioned in the show, I think it was in character for him to feel that by that, he had lost the right to become King (morally, not legally).
I agree that season 7 and 8 were seriously flawed in various aspects. But THIS is no example of bad writing. Jon did stay true to his character.
Oh, and regarding this bit from your original posting:
"That he wants to remain a bastard and wander the North???"
The Wildlings simply don’t care whether he’s a bastard or the trueborn son of a King or whatever. Such things do not matter among them.
I disagree - Jon never would have killed Dany. Jon was about honor and duty.
The writers want you to think that he had to kill Dany to stop her army - this is ridiculous - all of Westeros was free, and most or all of Essos too. Dany was done, she was calm - and the idiot writers have Jon put a knife through her heart - I call bullshit!
> Dany was done, she was calm
You’re wrong, didn’t you listen to her speech? She was far from done, she said so.
Of course you now can say "But this speech was made up by the same stupid writers who made Jon kill Dany, so it doesn’t count", which IS a valid argument IMO.
But then again you can’t say "she was done and calm". You CAN make that "she SHOULD HAVE BEEN done and calm"… but then you’re in the territory of speculation.
And of course he was all about duty… but duty to whom? In terms of "duty to Dany", well of course he can’t kill her. In terms of "duty to all the people living in Westeros" (the "moral" kind of duty), that’s an entirely different thing.
Just to clarify, what is the course of action you’re suggesting exactly? You’ve repeatedly stated that he should have taken the throne. So you’re suggesting he should have said to Dany: "Sorry, love, but I’m the rightful heir. Now will you kindly step aside and let me do the ruling, please? But don’t worry, I’ll be naming you the Master, sorry, Mistress of Dragons."
Is THAT what you’re suggesting? If not, please clarify.
What im suggesting is that Jon should have accepted his heritage - something that he wanted to know his whole life. There should have been a whole episode dedicated to Dany and Jon dealing with this, Dany questioning Bran and Sam. Dany accepting Jon as her Uncle and the true heir. Dany could have ordered the Unsullied to accept Jon as King.
Jon being in charge, he doesn't kill all the Lannister army. Cersei is held accountable and burned alive for killing Missandei. Once peace is achieved, Jon names Dany Queen to rule over Westeros, as King Jon goes up North to do whatever, he is King - he can go and do wherever he wants.
Again killing Dany was stupid and lazy writing!
In my eyes, this would have been totally out of character for Daenerys.
However, it remains to be seen if D&D or GRRM are responsible for this "stupid and lazy writing" – that is, IF we ever get the books (and I’m among those who doubt it).
Out of character for Dany to want to know the truth about Jon? I don't think so - Dany was always fair and honorable, until they had her burn the city.
Its my understanding that GRRM didn't write this mess.
> Out of character for Dany to want to know the truth about Jon?
No, out of character to simply step aside for him.
> Dany was always fair and honorable
If "fair and honorable" includes killing people who are in your way, then yes.
Most postings I’ve read (even from people who said that destroying KL was bad writing) didn’t deny that she has been cruel over and over again.
> Its my understanding that GRRM didn't write this mess.
Nobody knows how the books are going to end, so nobody knows if Dany being killed by Jon was his idea or not.
When was Dany cruel? when she roasted the Tarleys? They were at war.
Dany went from city to city freeing slaves - how is that cruel??
Until she roasted Kings Landing she was never cruel.
Oh, please.
Watch the show again, starting at season 1.
Or at least this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z2sIC9u_do.
I’m not saying the guy who made this video is right on everything, but it does contain a summery of her cruel moments.
Maybe you feel that the end justifies the means (ALL means), but even then it’s hard to deny that she has been cruel, you could only say (if you think that way) that being cruel was fine in that situation.
I say Dany was justified with all of her killings until Kings Landing - not a villain.
shareLove is the death of duty bro
shareHey, if I found out I was the rightful heir to some throne, my top priority in life would be avoiding the responsibility or ruling! Or reigning!
Of course unlike Jon, I'd ask my "successor" for a lot of money before officially abdicating.
You might discover that you like ruling.
shareNo, really, I'm pretty sure I'd rather retire into obscurity. Preferably with a whole lot of money in the Iron Bank.
shareMaybe be like King Robert. whores and wine every night, hunting expeditions with your buddies, wouldn't be bad.
shareSorry, but King Robert's lifestyle is like a tailored person Hell! I loathe hunting, I dont do whores, and and an arranged marriage to a bitch with psychopathic children is the burning icing on the hell-cake.
I'd join the Night's Watch first! But of course, I'd try to retire to a life of obscurity and wealth instead.
You're missing my point - when you're King, you do whatever you want.
shareYeah, a king does what he wants, right up until the moment the horrible wife that he had to marry for political reasons has him killed during a party, and sets out to murder all the children he fathered when you were trying to get away from her for a little while.
Dude, you are missing MY point.
If your King and you suspect your wife of treason you have her killed - its good to be King. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8z8SpgmF0sA
shareRemember when he felt so bad about being a bastard that he refused to have sex with women because he didn't want to father a bastard? The writers surely don't.
share