#jozor reread | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

jozor-johai · 27 days

Text

Ned has this small speech in AGOT Bran I about why he must behead Gared, and I think there's some really interesting takeaways. Not about why he must do it, the part he focuses on; the part Ned doesn't focus on: why it's legal, and what that means for Gared.

"Do you understand why I did it?" "He was a wildling," Bran said. "They carry off women and sell them to the Others." His lord father smiled. "Old Nan has been telling you stories again. In truth, the man was an oathbreaker, a deserter from the Night's Watch. No man is more dangerous. The deserter knows his life is forfeit if he is taken, so he will not flinch from any crime, no matter how vile.

Ned moves our attention along to why Ned had to be his own headsman, but in just a few sentences here, we've been introduced to the paradox of law that makes this system so fundamentally unjust and broken.

We're told that "no man is more dangerous" than this deserter, so we might think, for a split second, that Ned feels he must kill the man because he is dangerous. But as Ned points out, the logic is actually the reverse: "he knows his life is forfeit if he is taken, so he will not flinch from any crime" (emphasis mine). It is not the prevalence of crime that is creating the demand for law, here, it's the existence of this extreme law that is generating the crime. Not wanting to be killed, the deserter would do anything to survive.

For Ned, the epitome of law in the North, who literally acts as judge, jury, and executioner, the tautology of the reasoning is irrelevant. The man is dangerous, now, whatever the situation. Of course, for Ned it's also really about an adherence to the laws of the Night's Watch, which is an institution as old as his house. It's their death sentence to declare, his to pass.

This time reading it, though, I was struck by how Ned's words here are an inversion to Septon Meribald's broken man speech, which is too long to relay here but ends with this:

"He turns and runs, or crawls off afterward over the corpses of the slain, or steals away in the black of night, and he finds someplace to hide. All thought of home is gone by then, and kings and lords and gods mean less to him than a haunch of spoiled meat that will let him live another day, or a skin of bad wine that might drown his fear for a few hours. The broken man lives from day to day, from meal to meal, more beast than man. Lady Brienne is not wrong. In times like these, the traveler must beware of broken men, and fear them . . . but he should pity them as well."

Septon Meribald is describing Gared here, just as much as he's describing the men at war. There isn't a mention here directly of the threat of punishment for desertion, which is more extreme with the Night's Watch than elsewhere, but the reality is the same. Here, though, Meribald's approach is entirely different than Ned's—Meribald, who walks among the smallfolk and gives away what good he can offer, has a much more understanding and empathetic view of these men.

Ned has the capacity for this understanding, but his role is simply not to have kindness here. All of the goodness and kindness Ned has otherwise just doesn't matter here, because here Ned is the law, and Ned is a lord still.

With the fact that even Ned is given this treatment, we see how rigid and unjust the laws and class structures are here. Even a "good person" is not good in Ned's position.

I think this highlights the cause behind the growing smallfolk unrest throughout the books and especially in Feast/Dance. Even the good lords, the ones who can see the problems at work here, are still lords, and still hold themselves to the status quo that keeps them in power above all else. And it takes a very different perspective—like the kind Arya has gotten, for example—to see it the way Meribald does. (Though Arya has gone the opposite route away from forgiveness... that's interesting too.)

#jozor thoughts #asoiaf meta #valyrianscrolls #jozor reread #asoiaf

172 notes · View notes

jozor-johai · 1 month

Text

Reread the AGOT Prologue last night, and I was so caught up this time in how the dynamics of that chapter are a microcosm of the class dynamics in Westeros.

Not such a long post, but putting it after the cut for ease.

Waymar Royce, of course, stands in for the Lords, with his wealth and name and undeserved authority, while one-named Gared and Will are the smallfolk.

In this chapter, with a speaking cast of 3, there's already this question of where does power lie? In this scene, the smallfolk outnumber the lords 2-to-1, and neither believe in Waymar, but ultimately each of them defers to the lord's authority (the ratio is much more extreme in Westeros at large, but this works for a 3-person dynamic). Will and Gared also trust each other, and trust each other's expertise, more than either of them think Waymar should be trusted in any capacity—he's not leader by merit (he has much less experience than either of them), he's not leader by popular appeal (they laugh at him in their cups), and he's not leader by age (younger than the both).

And we see already in this small moment the ways in which authority attempts to deal with usurpation—which we will see played out over and over again throughout the entirety of ASOIAF.

Gared challenges Waymar's authority on the basis of experience, which is a justified complaint. Faced with an inarguable position, Waymar responds with unnecessary cruelty: "you ought to dress more warmly, Gared." This is one way for the upper class to keep the smallfolk in line—to flaunt their wealth and advantage, and to push back visciously against challenges. This is the Tywin technique, one which we see done consistently throughout the series.

The significance of this being a mental confrontation cannot be overstated: when confronted with Varys' riddle, Tyrion later observes that the rule "All depends on the man with the sword." Here, Gared is the man with the sword—he's a man-at-arms, and the better swordsman. While "Will doubted it[Royce's sword] had ever been swung in anger," "Will would not have given an iron bob for the lordling's life if Gared pulled it[his own sword] from its scabbard." Gared could fully kill Royce here, if he dared. And so the challenge, for Waymar, is to make sure Gared never dares. Power lies where men believe it lies, so Waymar's job as authority figure is to demoralize Gared, so he does not outright challenge Waymar's authority. (This is the role of public humiliation—another 'Tywin tactic,' but which is also used broadly).

Perhaps Gared would dare to challenge Waymar's authority if he were not alone. When Varys follows Tyrion's thinking that the man holding the sword might have some real power, he questions: why do the men with swords obey kings at all, then? Tyrion posits: "Because these child kings and drunken oafs can call other strong men, with other swords." So perhaps the issue is unity, a majority feeling—one man cannot rebel, lest his own class turn against him, but perhaps many can. We see this as the series goes on in instances like with the Sparrows, who amass enough numbers that they can imprison the queen, or with the sellswords in Meereen, who might turn the tide of battle if they switch sides (to the side that they believe might win).

To gain this advantage, Gared and Will would have to be a united front. In the beginning of this chapter, Will was a neutral figure, he's not willing to actually challenge that authority, he didn't want to be involved in the confrontation, but knew "he known "they would drag him into the quarrel sooner or later." Later, though, after witnessing Gared's demoralization, Will nearly steps in himself—in defense of Gared, out of respect for Gared's experience, and in a moment of class solidarity, Will speaks up to defend Gared, and is cut off:

"If Gared said it was the cold …" Will began.

"Have you drawn any watches this past week, Will?"

Here, Waymar's goal, as ruling class of this interaction, is to prevent class solidarity within the smallfolk. If Waymar responded too rudely, or with too much aggression, this might bind Gared and Will together for certain, and Waymar might be usurped (this is the result of the repeated aggressions of Aerys II, resulting in his death, or the repeated aggressions of Tywin which spawned the aforementioned Sparrows).

So Waymar has to employ a different strategy: (still a bit snidely) Waymar plays the role of 'encouraging mentor,' invoking this idea that he deserves to rule by the merit of being inherently 'wiser' or a keeper of 'knowledge'. He suggests that Will figure out for himself, under Waymar's guidance, that the cold could not possibly have killed the wildlings. Led more gently by Waymar, Will seems to decide for himself that Waymar is correct. In short, Waymar is able to reposition Will to be on his side, not Gared's, by leveraging his initial assumed authority and the existing attitude of elite education, even as that makes Will go against his own first-hand experience.

This is another tactic that we see repeatedly used throughout ASOIAF (and the world)—the ruling class acting as though they are simply elevating the ("innocently wrong") subjugated class to a more aware and knowledgeable position. If we believe the Maester conspiracy, they are the most obvious example of this, but the fact that it is only the lords who have access to Maesters means this is implicitly true without even needing a conspiracy—the ruling class is already gatekeeping knowledge and education from the subjugated class. (As an aside: the Maester conspiracy, ironically, is only concerned with the possibility of an even higher authority secretly gatekeeping knowledge from the nobility—in other words, the fear that the Maesters are treating the Lords the way that the Lords treat the smallfolk).

So let's return to Varys' final proposed answers to his own riddle: "Some say knowledge is power. Some tell us that all power comes from the gods. Others say it derives from law." Waymar has employed the knowledge-as-power against Will, and we're also constantly up against the backdrop of law-as-power: The Night's Watch.

Waymar references "Mormont," someone who Waymar does not want to disappoint, and they all consider the agreed-upon terms of the Night's Watch. Even in this microcosmic scenario, they are part of a system, one where this authority figure is, seemingly, held to his own authority figure, and one where the "rules" of the interaction have been determined long before now. In the end, once Waymar decides, "the order had been given, and honor bound them to obey." They have all agreed to a set of laws, already, which keep them bound to Waymar's authority.

So, ultimately, it is in this moment that despite Gared and Will being fully correct in their fears, despite being more experienced, wiser, older, and in all ways better rangers than Waymar, authority itself held true, and Waymar marched them all on towards his own death.

#jozor thoughts #asoiaf meta #valyrianscrolls #AGOT Prologue #asoiaf analysis #asoiaf #night's watch #jozor reread

24 notes · View notes