BlackberryJam May 22, 2015 Share May 22, 2015 (edited) We often see the assertion that GRRM is out there subverting tropes like a champ. What if he subverting the trope of the Job-like character with Sansa? What if instead of getting repeatedly beaten down before rises from the ashes to lay waste to her enemies (or you know, something else where she hurts them instead of being her) she remains the perpetual victim until she dies a gruesome death? I just keep going back to "What is Sansa's story?" v "What have we predicted is Sansa's story?" I'm thinking the fans might have been wrong all along. I'm curious to see where Littlefinger appears next. Will he get beamed to Dorne or back to Winterfell? He has the best jetpack in Westeros. Edited May 22, 2015 by BlackberryJam 5 Link to comment
Oscirus May 22, 2015 Share May 22, 2015 Littlefinger betrayed the previous Hand by siding with Cersei. Tyrion would not remove his own side's loyalists on the basis of their siding with him. Slynt was removed for carrying out the massacre of the bastards, and because Tyrion wanted to control the City Watch himself. The old maester was a Lannister loyalist and Tyrion had no problem removing him. 1 Link to comment
SeanC May 22, 2015 Share May 22, 2015 We often see the assertion that GRRM is out there subverting tropes like a champ. What if he subverting the trope of the Job-like character with Sansa? What if instead of getting repeatedly beaten down before rises from the ashes to lay waste to her enemies (or you know, something else where she hurts them instead of being her) she remains the perpetual victim until she dies a gruesome death? GRRM himself has talked about Sansa's story as learning to play the game of thrones, and she's directly paralleled with her siblings. The old maester was a Lannister loyalist and Tyrion had no problem removing him. Tyrion removed him because he betrayed Tyrion's confidence, not because he betrayed Ned. 1 Link to comment
Elkins May 22, 2015 Share May 22, 2015 But the way it played out, it did nothing to show us that Sansa is any different from how she started out, or that she's any different from any other woman (which is part of the terrorism of M-F rape). Would it be a good thing for the text to tell us that Sansa is "different from any other woman" when it comes to her ability to avoid being raped by a psychopath? Do you think that would be a useful or beneficial or truthful thing for a work of fiction to tell its audience? I don't. Actually, people get raped, flayed, beaten, beheaded, etc...even if they are strong. Even if they are smart. Even if they are good and kind and wise and beautiful. Another person's rottenness is exactly that: THEIR rottenness. You can't control it. Margaery manipulated Joffrey for a little bit, but as soon as no one else was around to victimize, or they disagreed on something, he'd have victimized her. That is why her family had to kill him. There is not in fact a type of person called a "victim." There are victimizers like The Mountain, Joffrey, Ramsey, etc...and your likelihood of being victimized by them has mainly to do with 1) the availability of other victims, 2) the immediate consequences related to victimizing you, and 3) the mood he's in. And that is part of the reason why I don't. Othering the victims of sexual violence is a thing that happens a lot, in part I think because it helps people reassure themselves that it will never happen to them. It only happens to women (thinks a man), or to weak women (thinks a woman), or to women who dress a certain way, or who lack common sense, or who fall for the wrong men, or who are gullible or naive or untalented or spoiled, or who "have their head up their ass," or who are "like the chick in a scary movie that goes down into the dark basement." Or who are too proud, or too humble, or much too passive. or far too aggressive, or too smart for their own good or just plain stupid. Or who fit some other elusive set of conditions that we've decided today shall be the identifying characteristics of a "victim." It only happens to minor characters, people Not Like Us, people with whom we aren't really expected to identify anyway. But it will never happen to a protagonist. It will never happen to a POV character. It will never happen to a character we are meant to identify with. It will never happen to us. I really loved this other post from Hecate7 that was posted on the 'Television vs Books' thread. I 'liked' it when I first read it last week, and I wish I could have done so a hundred more times, because it articulates my feelings about this issue so much better than I seem to be able to do myself. And since it also sums up my reaction to some of the furor over Sunday night's episode, I thought it would make sense (and I hope Hecate7 doesn't mind my doing this) to repost part of it here. We're not supposed to feel good about her storyline. And I don't know why people are piling it on so about Sansa being a "victim." As we have just been shown quite brilliantly in the story, the very best way to make someone a victim is to tell them not to be a victim any more, blame them for being a victim, and imply to them (or even outright tell them) that they have the power to change a situation they do not, in fact, have power to change. . . . . [snip] If we're going to have Sansa get raped, then I want them to do it unambiguously. None of this, "well, it wasn't rape because she liked it later," or "it was consensual, you just couldn't tell" stuff. This is Ramsey Bolton we're talking about. I don't want to be told "he can be a nice guy when he wants to, he just didn't want to with those other people." I don't want to be told, "you can control your rapist/jailer/torturer by using your feminine wiles." If we're gonna do this, let's do this. Tell me, "If society is set up for women to be raped and treated like property, then women are dependent on either their own swords, or the power of their male relatives, to protect them from rape and worse." Tell me the truth, that there are men like Jon Snow or Tyrion, who wouldn't rape Sansa, and then there are all the other men in Westeros, and then there are the Ramsey Boltons. Tell me that the people who whisper, "don't be a victim," and then leave you to the mercy of the victimizer, are collaborating with the victimizer. Because that is something people should know. I find this post doubly relevant to this particular episode, because -- appropriately enough for one so strongly focused on Sansa --this episode was all about truth and lies. It wasn't in the least bit subtle about it, either; the motif got pounded home in every last one of the plotlines, even when the writers really had to work to shoehorn it in (Myrcella to Trystane: "Are you lying to me?"). Truth and lies, truth and lies, over and over and over again. In this episode of all episodes, do we really want the story to lie to us? Because Sansa being able to charm or flirt or manipulate Ramsay into delaying the wedding or delaying the bedding or treating her gently or respecting her person, or Sansa stabbing Ramsay in the face, or Sansa being such a stoic that she doesn't cry out in pain and misery even while being violently deflowered by a psychopath whose previous victim has been given a front row seat... None of those outcomes could win the Game of Faces. They fail the smell test; they ring hollow and empty and false. And they don't even have the excuse of benevolent intent to fall back on, because those voices that continually whisper 'don't be a victim' in our ears? Those voices do not serve our interests. Their lies can never make us strong. 6 Link to comment
Boundary May 22, 2015 Share May 22, 2015 In this episode of all episodes, do we really want the story to lie to us? My problem doesn't lie with this episode. It started early in episode 1, when LF got communication from Roose that the wedding is on. Why they did writers make that specific choice? Why a wedding? Specifically, why Sansa and Ramsey's wedding? Just before that moment, they could have brought Sansa to Winterfell under any other myriad of guises. But they went with a wedding. To Ramsey. After that, of course they have to square the circle: do they alter Ramsey's character on the wedding night? Do they give Sansa free will, proper free will, whether to choose this marriage? Do they make LF's intelligence/cunning more malleable because how else does he get to agree with this? It's obvious they chose to stay faithful with Ramsey, so they practically force marched Sansa (LF confessed his plan at Moat Cailin and she only had a minute to decide!). What does marrying your enemy and potentially having his children have anything to do with revenge? And they also made LF either stupid or wilfully cruel to the one person we all thought he loved. So yes, the story lied us, and without those lies this rape wouldn't have happened. 3 Link to comment
J----av May 22, 2015 Share May 22, 2015 My problem doesn't lie with this episode. It started early in episode 1, when LF got communication from Roose that the wedding is on. Why they did writers make that specific choice? Why a wedding? Specifically, why Sansa and Ramsey's wedding? Just before that moment, they could have brought Sansa to Winterfell under any other myriad of guises. But they went with a wedding. To Ramsey. After that, of course they have to square the circle: do they alter Ramsey's character on the wedding night? Do they give Sansa free will, proper free will, whether to choose this marriage? Do they make LF's intelligence/cunning more malleable because how else does he get to agree with this? It's obvious they chose to stay faithful with Ramsey, so they practically force marched Sansa (LF confessed his plan at Moat Cailin and she only had a minute to decide!). What does marrying your enemy and potentially having his children have anything to do with revenge? And they also made LF either stupid or wilfully cruel to the one person we all thought he loved. So yes, the story lied us, and without those lies this rape wouldn't have happened. LF loves LF . I though most people thought that by now 3 Link to comment
Heathrowe May 22, 2015 Share May 22, 2015 (edited) Someone mentioned that it's been 5 seasons of watching the Starks suffer, and it's time for a pay off. I totally agree. Except that...in history, sometimes it takes longer. So my attention span might not matter. I don't like what happened to Sansa this past episode, but I do like that Sansa is now set up in a place where she could possibly take back Winterfell-whether that's through a battle or more likely, her womb. Honestly-it would have have been also horrifying if Ramsay had "made love" to her - I think at this point in the story, Sansa would either be off screen (as in the books) or be someone's wife and there aren't many consensual choices for her that forward the story. Someone else posted the idea of her ruling the North as a Virgin Queen, which is pretty brilliant. I would have loved that, but I guess there's a different end game. History is full of women who married men they hated, had horrible marriages, and then lived for their son the king. A small victory over darkness sometime soon would make this show easier for me to watch again, because right now, I'm starting to feel like a masochist. Edited May 22, 2015 by Heathrowe 2 Link to comment
SeanC May 23, 2015 Share May 23, 2015 (edited) In this episode of all episodes, do we really want the story to lie to us? Because Sansa being able to charm or flirt or manipulate Ramsay into delaying the wedding or delaying the bedding or treating her gently or respecting her person, or Sansa stabbing Ramsay in the face, or Sansa being such a stoic that she doesn't cry out in pain and misery even while being violently deflowered by a psychopath whose previous victim has been given a front row seat... None of those outcomes could win the Game of Faces. They fail the smell test; they ring hollow and empty and false. And they don't even have the excuse of benevolent intent to fall back on, because those voices that continually whisper 'don't be a victim' in our ears? Those voices do not serve our interests. Their lies can never make us strong. I think that's a load of nonsense. This show "lies to us" by telling us that Arya is still alive, when she should by any reasonable measure have been killed at least a dozen times by now, to cite just one example. This show is fiction, and the writers can frame the narrative however they want. They chose to schedule the wedding when they did; it was not "inevitable", and it could easily have been located later for any number of logical reasons. The truth is that they chose to rewrite Sansa's narrative to have her be raped, for the benefit of Theon's story. Edited May 23, 2015 by SeanC 3 Link to comment
Pete Martell May 23, 2015 Share May 23, 2015 LF loves LF . I though most people thought that by now If that is the case then Cogman telling EW that Littlefinger had no idea how dangerous Ramsay was wouldn't have been necessary. I think the show wants it both ways - they want to present Littlefinger as dangerous, but they also want us to see that someone else is always worse (Cersei, Joffrey, the Boltons). I think it's because on some level they see him as some type of devilish rogue who can occasionally have a heart. I tend to see him as a self-important dumbass, so I don't have the patience to see him pull an "oops" by droning on to Sansa about how important it is for her to learn only to lead her into a situation where there is no learning, where, with or without any witty asides or clever plans, she would be raped day after day and the best she could hope for would be a quick death. 1 Link to comment
Oscirus May 23, 2015 Share May 23, 2015 Tyrion removed him because he betrayed Tyrion's confidence, not because he betrayed Ned. Yea, but he also commented on the fact that the old maester screwed over the previous hands of the king. Cersei loyalists are not Tyrion loyalists. Which is why his first mission was to remove all the moles/people who he thinks would betray him. If Tyrion thought he had anything to worry about, Little finger would've been removed. And they also made LF either stupid or wilfully cruel to the one person we all thought he loved. So yes, the story lied us, and without those lies this rape wouldn't have happened. Littlefinger also appears to get off on humiliating Stark women. Hence his hiding Catelyn in a whorehouse ( I refuse to believe that LF didn't know of a better place to hide her), his trying to kiss Cate in the middle of the war in the tent, his purposely kissing Sansa in front of Lysa. Maybe I'm overthinking this but I really do think that psychologically, he tries to bring these women down to his level. 1 Link to comment
Pete Martell May 23, 2015 Share May 23, 2015 Someone mentioned that it's been 5 seasons of watching the Starks suffer, and it's time for a pay off. I totally agree. Except that...in history, sometimes it takes longer. So my attention span might not matter. I don't like what happened to Sansa this past episode, but I do like that Sansa is now set up in a place where she could possibly take back Winterfell-whether that's through a battle or more likely, her womb. The problem for me is that I just don't care anymore about most of the Starks. I haven't cared about Arya since season 2. To me she's a one-note, irrelevant character steeped in "not like other girls" tropes - once you peel back the idea that she's superior because she uses a sword and wants to kill people, there isn't much left of her. Bran is gone. Rickon is gone. Sansa has been robbed of her voice and journey. Not once this season have I felt like anything she's done is about her. It's about one man after another, and about the show's odd fixation on building her up just to tear her down, punishing her for ever daring to think she can be more than a victim and a pawn. After the somewhat tedious scenes last season of Littlefinger "teaching" her how to survive, she is still stuck exactly where she was before, only without the character dynamics that made me interested in her story in season 2 and to a much lesser degree season 3. The only Stark who has a story I can invest in or see as strong or going anywhere is Jon. Link to comment
Advance35 May 23, 2015 Share May 23, 2015 We often see the assertion that GRRM is out there subverting tropes like a champ. What if he subverting the trope of the Job-like character with Sansa? What if instead of getting repeatedly beaten down before rises from the ashes to lay waste to her enemies (or you know, something else where she hurts them instead of being her) she remains the perpetual victim until she dies a gruesome death? I just keep going back to "What is Sansa's story?" v "What have we predicted is Sansa's story?" I'm thinking the fans might have been wrong all along. That's the impression I've gotten as well. We DON'T know that Sansa's development has been thrown off or derailed because WE DON'T KNOW what her ultimate role in this saga is supposed to be. Will she be a kind of Joan of Arc, a hardened Femme Fatale, A Queen, A fallen Princess who ultimately ends up a Peasant, we DO NOT know. If anyone knows what GRRM's ultimate endgame for the Sansa Stark character is, please, PLEASE post it. As far as I'm concerned the differences between Sansa in Season 2 and present are, She knows she's ultimately alone in the world. She is nobodies friend and nobody is hers, I get the impression she hates EVERYONE, in the past despite everything Sansa has had a genuine empathy for others and I don't see that in her anymore. I think there is an inner coldness. She's actively worked to cover up the murder of a relative/Paramount Lord (Lyssa Arryn). Many things are subjective and I think perception of Sansa is one of them. I'm curious to see where Littlefinger appears next. Will he get beamed to Dorne or back to Winterfell? He has the best jetpack in Westeros. I think the show has gotten better with Travel. LF left for Kings Landing in Episode 4 and he wasn't in Episode 5. So it clearly took him sometime to get back to the capital. Same with Olenna traveling from Highgarden. Margaery sent word in Episode 4 and we didn't see Olenna arriving too Kings Landing until Episode 6. Link to comment
BlackberryJam May 23, 2015 Share May 23, 2015 The truth is that they chose to rewrite Sansa's narrative to have her be raped, for the benefit of Theon's story. That's a load of horse hockey. It's your opinion, not the truth. And unless you've read Winds and Dream, you have no idea what Sansa's narrative is. And it seems to me this change really benefits Sansa's narrative because the Vale story is Barbara Cartland with an edge boring. This rewrite brings Sansa much closer to endgame and elevates her importance to the story, having her present in Winterfell, married to a Bolton. She's IN the game. The story is not all ABOUT the rape. I have no idea why people would ever think the rape IS the story. The rape is one more step along the way. What is this obsession with Sansa's virginity? Ugh. The story ISN'T the rape. The story IS Sansa, finally wedded, back in Winterfell. This combines Theon's story and makes Sansa's story relevant. 6 Link to comment
Pete Martell May 23, 2015 Share May 23, 2015 The truth is that they chose to rewrite Sansa's narrative to have her be raped, for the benefit of Theon's story. If this were for the benefit of Theon's story, why has he barely appeared this season? I'd say it's for shock value, it's their misguided idea of what makes a woman more "interesting," and it's a way to streamline Sansa and Theon and combine their stories together to save airtime, airtime they can give to characters they're actually invested in (like even more of Tyrion pouting through Essos). 1 Link to comment
SeanC May 23, 2015 Share May 23, 2015 If this were for the benefit of Theon's story, why has he barely appeared this season? His screentime has been concentrated in the last two episodes, which I expect will continue now that the writers got their ducks in a row. The point is that the rape of Ramsay's bride is about what Theon witnesses and how it affects him, not the bride. That's a load of horse hockey. It's your opinion, not the truth. And unless you've read Winds and Dream, you have no idea what Sansa's narrative is. And it seems to me this change really benefits Sansa's narrative because the Vale story is Barbara Cartland with an edge boring. This rewrite brings Sansa much closer to endgame and elevates her importance to the story, having her present in Winterfell, married to a Bolton. She's IN the game. The story is not all ABOUT the rape. I have no idea why people would ever think the rape IS the story. The rape is one more step along the way. What is this obsession with Sansa's virginity? Ugh. The story ISN'T the rape. The story IS Sansa, finally wedded, back in Winterfell. This combines Theon's story and makes Sansa's story relevant. Sansa's story is relevant, because she's one of the leads and is in the process of learning the game and consolidating power in a vital region of Westeros, while interacting with Littlefinger, one of the most important masterminds in the whole story. As for the rewrite putting Sansa "in" the game, it's put her there exclusively as a pawn, which is what she's been all season -- and it didn't have to be that way, even if they sent her to Winterfell, but that's how the writers wrote it. 4 Link to comment
Pete Martell May 23, 2015 Share May 23, 2015 His screentime has been concentrated in the last two episodes, which I expect will continue now that the writers got their ducks in a row. The point is that the rape of Ramsay's bride is about what Theon witnesses and how it affects him, not the bride. I think it's probably supposed to be how it affects them both, which is a way to save time for characters D&D actually care about, but I think the truncated nature of the story hurts everyone involved. Link to comment
SeanC May 23, 2015 Share May 23, 2015 I think it's probably supposed to be how it affects them both, which is a way to save time for characters D&D actually care about, but I think the truncated nature of the story hurts everyone involved. I just have zero faith in the writers to handle this. Sansa was barely even given any time to mourn the murders of her own family (including precisely zero time to mourn the deaths of two family members whose continued survival is evidently supposed to be a huge revelation to her this season). I'm not expecting anything more than "Sansa looks sad/cries a bit, but then carries on because she is a tough chick". Link to comment
Pete Martell May 23, 2015 Share May 23, 2015 (edited) I have no faith in the writers - as soon as I realized her new arc was sitting around inns where she could be easily recognized I realized just how little interest the show had in this whole story and it's becoming worse and worse with each episode; I just don't think they did this because of Theon. They've had so much gushy showcasing of Ramsay this season I now think that pretty much any interesting material Alfie probably had in the last two seasons was just because they love Iwan/Ramsay. I think if not for wanting to tell the Boltons story Theon and Sansa would be rowing with Gendry. Edited May 23, 2015 by Pete Martell Link to comment
Elkins May 23, 2015 Share May 23, 2015 (edited) This show is fiction, and the writers can frame the narrative however they want. Correct. And in this case, the writers chose to frame the narrative in a way that removes our ability to comfortably other Ramsay's wife, which is why some people are so distressed. Jeyne Poole was fine with readers, as many readers have explained over the past week or so, because she wasn't an important character. She was a faceless cipher whose designated role was to service Theon's story, a means to another person's ends, a diposable object. A special class of Unperson known as "victim," an underclass whose distinguishing characteristic is the inability ever to have "agency" (a word whose meaning seems to have drifted off towards an infinitely vague horizon). Someone with no story of her own. In short, as Zalyn wrote, no "different from any other woman." Not someone we need to identify with at all. A typical Othered victim. Gender: feminine. But main characters are different, right? POV characters are different. They have, as many people have also pointed out over the past week, their own stories. You can't just substitute Sansa for Jeyne, because Sansa has her own story to tell. She is not a means to someone else's end, but is "different from any other woman." We need to be able to identify with her. We insist that she must have agency; she is not Othered. Not object but subject. Gender: masculine. POV characters don't get raped. George R.R. Martin said so himself. (Except when it's Dany, because...because why? Because we all like to pretend that never happened? I don't know if Martin believes that the fact that Dany later fell in twoo wuv somehow retroactively turned Rape into NotRape or what, but honestly, my blood pressure and I would probably really prefer not even to know how he'd defend that statement.) George R.R. Martin considers rape off-limits for POV characters? Oh, of course he fucking would. Because being a POV character is a job for a subject, not an object, and as such, regardless of sex, the POV characters are all granted an honorary masculine gender. They live their lives in the active voice, and in the active voice, as we all know, Mr. Morton is the subject of the sentence, and what the predicate says, he does. But rape is such an extraordinarily feminizing event that people who are raped, men and women alike, must be fixed forever into gender mode feminine, irrevocably transformed from grammatical subject to grammatical object. How could it be otherwise? They failed to eschew the passive voice -- something was done to them -- and now what the predicate says is no longer what they're the ones doing. And that's just not on for a POV character with whom we're supposed to identify, amirite, Mr. Morton? Er, I mean Mr. Martin? Whatever. Martin's gender issues would probably make for a doorstopper of their own, but I'm not sure why the television show should feel the need to ape all of those same screwed-up ideas, nor do I see why any of its viewers should. Rape is a fundamental part of the human experience for a huge number of people in this world, men and women and children, and each and every one of those people considers themselves--rightly!--the protagonist of their own story. They are not incapable of action, and they have plenty of agency. None of the things they have learned over the years has been erased. Their psychological development has not been revoked. And they remain the POV characters narrating their own lives, no matter how many people insist that their life experiences somehow magically render them inappropiate for that role. They are still the subject of their sentence -- and what the predicate says, they do. Edited May 23, 2015 by Elkins 4 Link to comment
BlackberryJam May 23, 2015 Share May 23, 2015 (edited) I think you're willfully misinterpreting there, SeanC. I clearly made the point that Sansa's Vale story is irrelevant, not Sansa herself. But you know, that's just fine. You don't know endgame. You don't know what's going to happen and what's not. None of us do. We are all Unsullied and I think that's starting to feel a bit terrifying and it's leading to this panic and handwringing of how awful everything is. Sometimes I get terrified that Brienne is going to die and want to throw things, too. However, it's Game of Thrones. The whole story is likely to end in a vast wasteland. Rule over a kingdom of ashes, anyone? But this hysterical panic leading to assumptions of the worst seems to be unproductive, and certainly un-fun. We should all be relaxing and enjoying the ride... That's what television is for? To entertain us? Let's be entertained! ETA: YES ELKINS ALL THE YES. The act of rape SHOULD be shown through the POV of the victim. A woman is has been raped doesn't suddenly become a passive participant in her life. The insistence of that is disgusting. Thank you. But I'm going back to lightening the mood and saying I'm going to see that song all day! Edited May 23, 2015 by BlackberryJam 1 Link to comment
Pete Martell May 23, 2015 Share May 23, 2015 Correct. And in this case, the writers chose to frame the narrative in a way that removes our ability to comfortably other Ramsay's wife, which is why some people are so distressed. To me, if Sansa is mostly there to be manipulated by one man, then raped by another, then she is being othered. She's an object, not a character. I don't really see this being told from her POV. As with Cersei last season, the confusing comments from TPTB make me have no idea what her POV even is. Link to comment
Boundary May 23, 2015 Share May 23, 2015 (edited) I think you're willfully misinterpreting there, SeanC. I clearly made the point that Sansa's Vale story is irrelevant, not Sansa herself. Is it irrelevant, the Vale I mean? The one region (like Dorne) that didn't engage in the war, the one region noted to have food stocks for the coming winter. The one region with a boy Lord, Warden of the East. The one region where most likely Dany will land (I don't know this for sure but on balance of probabilities, it's quite likely). The show has made a lot assumptions about the Vale in the scramble to get out of there. They have assumed that LF has the Lords Declarants in his pocket, totally foregoing the politics; that controlling Lord Robert Arryn is not a significant thing to fight over (and totally glossed over Sansa's quiet influence over Sweetrobin, his health and lack of direct relatives). Also, if the Vale were to join the North (or Dany) in fighting the the Boltons, Iron Throne or the Others (or indeed, if they were to be opposite Dany and/or Aegon) then Sansa's position in the Vale is deliberate. She's the only POV character in that region too. Edited May 23, 2015 by Boundary 2 Link to comment
SeanC May 23, 2015 Share May 23, 2015 (edited) But main characters are different, right? POV characters are different. They have, as many people have also pointed out over the past week, their own stories. You can't just substitute Sansa for Jeyne, because Sansa has her own story to tell. She is not a means to someone else's end, but is "different from any other woman." We need to be able to identify with her. We insist that she must have agency; she is not Othered. Not object but subject. Gender: masculine. They are not incapable of action, and they have plenty of agency. None of the things they have learned over the years has been erased. Their psychological development has not been revoked. That has nothing whatsoever to do with what I said. Yes, Sansa has her own story, and is not a means to someone else's. And the rape of Ramsay's bride is a means to someone else's story. It has nothing to do with her being "different from any other woman"; it has to do with the writers taking away her story and her character development in the service of this plot (which is exactly what this story has done; any trace of the development she showed in 408 has vanished this season, apart from her wardrobe). It is a complete repeat of a story she already had, except even worse. I think you're willfully misinterpreting there, SeanC. I clearly made the point that Sansa's Vale story is irrelevant, not Sansa herself. The Vale has been set up as a major part of the next phase of the story, and Sansa is our view into it; it is her stage. ETA: YES ELKINS ALL THE YES. The act of rape SHOULD be shown through the POV of the victim. A woman is has been raped doesn't suddenly become a passive participant in her life. The insistence of that is disgusting. Thank you. But it wasn't shown through the POV of the victim. Theon was the POV, because the point of the rape was his reaction. And Sansa has been a passive participant all season, as part and parcel of how this storyline has been written. That's why I object to it. Edited May 23, 2015 by SeanC 1 Link to comment
MrWhyt May 23, 2015 Share May 23, 2015 t has nothing to do with her being "different from any other woman"; it has to do with the writers taking away her story and her character development in the service of this plot (which is exactly what this story has done; any trace of the development she showed in 408 has vanished this season, apart from her wardrobe). It is a complete repeat of a story she already had, except even worse. What is Sansa's story? we're past book territory, her story is unknown to us. 3 Link to comment
SeanC May 23, 2015 Share May 23, 2015 What is Sansa's story? we're past book territory, her story is unknown to us. We're not, though. Sansa's story has shown her growing as a player, and is centered in the Vale of Arryn. We're not past book territory here; her book plot was basically discarded, and she was given someone else's. 1 Link to comment
Silje May 23, 2015 Share May 23, 2015 I would have really liked to see Sansa in the Vale. The writers have said that they loved the Winterfell plot with Ramsay, Jeyne and Theon, but they didn't have the character of Jeyne so they had Sansa fill that role. This doesn't make me certain that the Winterfell plot is more important than the Vale plot, just that the writers loves it more. Maybe because it's more shocking, I don't know. Something similar might happen to Sansa in the books, maybe Harry the Heir isn't just a rude asshole, but violent too, maybe it's someone we haven't met yet. If it happens in the books, I won't like it but everything leading to it might actually make sense. Because one of my problems with what the show has done with Sansa this season is that it does not make any sense. Can anyone explain how marrying Ramsay will get Sansa revenge? Does she gain anything in that marriage that can help her? Sansa and Littlefinger goes to Winterfell hoping to get revenge but their scene in the crypts clearly show that they don't actually have a concrete plan to accomplish that. It's 1) hope Stannis takes Winterfell before the wedding, or 2) marry Ramsay and...? What is Sansa's story? we're past book territory, her story is unknown to us. Sansa still had book plot left. The plan was to marry Harry the Heir and get the support of the Vale to take back Winterfell, that's what her story could/should have been this season. GRRM wrote a blog post after this episode about how different journeys can lead to the same end, where he urged those curious about the road the books are taking to read his sample chapters from Winds of Winter. In Sansa's sample chapter she is happy-ish, meeting Harry the Heir and actually trying to play the game. . 2 Link to comment
Boundary May 23, 2015 Share May 23, 2015 Can anyone explain how marrying Ramsay will get Sansa revenge? Does she gain anything in that marriage that can help her? Sansa and Littlefinger goes to Winterfell hoping to get revenge but their scene in the crypts clearly show that they don't actually have a concrete plan to accomplish that. It's 1) hope Stannis takes Winterfell before the wedding, or 2) marry Ramsay and...? ... have his children? Apparently that's revenge. That's how much thought the writers put into this plot. 1 Link to comment
Oscirus May 23, 2015 Share May 23, 2015 Can anyone explain how marrying Ramsay will get Sansa revenge? Does she gain anything in that marriage that can help her? Puts her back in winterfell and if she's good enough, she could be able to start an uprising that would unseat the Boltons. 1 Link to comment
Silje May 23, 2015 Share May 23, 2015 Puts her back in winterfell and if she's good enough, she could be able to start an uprising that would unseat the Boltons. It puts her in Winterfell where the Boltons will control her. If the plan is to start an uprising, why couldn't Sansa just go directly to the lords still loyal to the Starks and try to get their support in taking back her home? 1 Link to comment
Oscirus May 23, 2015 Share May 23, 2015 (edited) You have to figure that they were likely watching her pretty heavily as soon as she arrived there. Getting married at least temporarily gives her some breathing space since I'd assume that they wouldn't take her as seriously once they have what they want from her. It's also likely that she underestimated Ramsey's depravity until it was too late. Edited May 23, 2015 by Oscirus 2 Link to comment
Avaleigh May 24, 2015 Share May 24, 2015 That's a load of horse hockey. It's your opinion, not the truth. And unless you've read Winds and Dream, you have no idea what Sansa's narrative is. And it seems to me this change really benefits Sansa's narrative because the Vale story is Barbara Cartland with an edge boring. This rewrite brings Sansa much closer to endgame and elevates her importance to the story, having her present in Winterfell, married to a Bolton. She's IN the game. The story is not all ABOUT the rape. I have no idea why people would ever think the rape IS the story. The rape is one more step along the way. What is this obsession with Sansa's virginity? Ugh. The story ISN'T the rape. The story IS Sansa, finally wedded, back in Winterfell. Thank you for all of this. The comment about Sansa in the Vale sometimes coming across as slightly superior Barbara Cartland made me lol. I think even more puzzling than the focus on Sansa's virginity is the idea that she should have been able to say something to Ramsay or even Roose that would somehow have made her wedding night more tolerable. That Mockingbird!Sansa should have been able to pull this off because that's more or less what was being set up when she had her transformation. I had and continue to have a very positive response to that scene but at the same time I feel like too much might have been made of Sansa in that episode in terms of how far she's come. She told the truth to the Lords Declarant about who she was, covered for Littlefinger, dyed her hair, made herself a new dress, and all of a sudden it seemed like some viewers were practically expecting the moon from her like she was going to become more and more unstoppable from now and nothing else should be allowed to get in the way of this. When Sansa explains why she covered for LF she basically tells us 'better the devil you know' so she still knows that she's allied with a kind of devil but she still feels like she needs to trust him anyway. She isn't feeling particularly powerful she's just doing what she can to survive IMO. I also think that Sansa had the chance to potentially take more control over her life by telling the truth about Lysa's death, but instead she thought it would be safer to protect a man like LF for her own benefit. I don't think she's bad for making a decision like this I just think that it isn't surprising that Sansa isn't quite there yet when it comes to longer having to take shit from anybody. I'm confident she'll get there eventually. His screentime has been concentrated in the last two episodes, which I expect will continue now that the writers got their ducks in a row. The point is that the rape of Ramsay's bride is about what Theon witnesses and how it affects him, not the bride. I disagree. I thought what Sansa was feeling and going through was the most powerful part of the scene. It was definitely more about what Sansa was going through IMO. Any emotions that Theon happened to be feeling were secondary for me. ... have his children? Apparently that's revenge. That's how much thought the writers put into this plot. In TWOIAF there are too many instances of weddings patching up vicious rivalries (or at least attempting to patch them up) to count. I think Sansa married Ramsay so that she could be the Lady of Winterfell and get her foot back in the door. I think it's as simple as that. There's power in being a lady of a great house and with the power she gains from that position she'll eventually be able to seek revenge. We're not, though. Sansa's story has shown her growing as a player, and is centered in the Vale of Arryn. We're not past book territory here; her book plot was basically discarded, and she was given someone else's. Right. That being said, you still have no idea if Sansa is going to have a horrible wedding night with Harry. For all we know Sansa could end up dealing with something horrible during her time in the Vale. How do we know she isn't victimized again? How do we know she isn't rescued by some man in the books? How do we know she's only going to have wins from here on out? How do we know she isn't going to come up against sexual assault? How do we know that she won't still end up in difficult circumstances at Winterfell? For all we know D&D might have cut to the chase as far as bringing Sansa to Winterfell sooner rather than later. That has nothing whatsoever to do with what I said. Yes, Sansa has her own story, and is not a means to someone else's. And the rape of Ramsay's bride is a means to someone else's story. It has nothing to do with her being "different from any other woman"; it has to do with the writers taking away her story and her character development in the service of this plot (which is exactly what this story has done; any trace of the development she showed in 408 has vanished this season, apart from her wardrobe). It is a complete repeat of a story she already had, except even worse. I actually like being able to compare and contrast them. I agree that there are similarities but there are also some pretty significant differences and I think they've already been noted. She's the Stark of Winterfell now and supposedly there always needs to be one. I think that one is important enough on its own. 4 Link to comment
J----av May 24, 2015 Share May 24, 2015 Sansa still had book plot left. The plan was to marry Harry the Heir and get the support of the Vale to take back Winterfell, that's what her story could/should have been this season. GRRM wrote a blog post after this episode about how different journeys can lead to the same end, where he urged those curious about the road the books are taking to read his sample chapters from Winds of Winter. In Sansa's sample chapter she is happy-ish, meeting Harry the Heir and actually trying to play the game. . Last episode they did not even have enough time for Jon, Dany or Stannis. The episode before they didn't have time for Jamie/Bronn, Arya or Cercie and KL. Now you wanted them to add another story and location to this already crammed season? Because the show only has 10 hour long episodes the show needs to combine stories and cut down on locations. Adding Sansa in the Vale (which many thought was boring in the books) would take away more screen time from people like Tyrion, Arya, Cercie, Stannis etc.... 2 Link to comment
Pogojoco May 24, 2015 Share May 24, 2015 (edited) The Vale, in the book at least, is pretty important. It's more important than Dorne (which has so far been a complete waste of time in the show- Jamie and Bronn are amusing and it's pretty to look at, but that's it. Maybe more interesting than fighting over Myrcella would be one or more of the Dornish talking about seeking out Dany.) The Vale been kept separate from the War of Five Kings for the most part. It also has stores of food and lots of soldiers. It's been touched on by the Cersei and Littlefinger scene, but controlling the Vale at this point will win the War of Five Kings (which is still going on. It's down to two kings. Although, they've never quite killed Balon Greyjoy- for mysterious reasons) Of course, Dany and her dragons throws as wrench in the works as does the arrival of Winter and the Others. But the stores of food certainly help the winter part. Edited May 24, 2015 by Pogojoco 2 Link to comment
ElizaD May 24, 2015 Share May 24, 2015 Whatever happens to Sansa in the books, and I don't think it'll all be smooth sailing, I doubt she will repeat Jeyne's storyline of being raped by Ramsay, a character who exists to outdo all the sadistic sickos GRRM had previously written about. I don't believe that Book Sansa will undergo a similarly horrible marital rape: the more likely possibility is that the showrunners wanted to include the Ramsay/Theon/Jeyne storyline they liked and just changed the victim without caring about anything in Sansa's story/character other than that, I would now predict, she eventually returns North when her Vale plot has played out? Marriage to Ramsay is a complete failure that gets her nothing: she abandoned the safety and untouched army of the Vale, its malleable child-lord, and the virginity that was an asset on the marriage alliance market for the taint of association with the hated, doomed Boltons and the mere chance that maybe Stannis will attack Winterfell when she and random peasant servants can stab the guards at the gate or something. She won't gain any power by being in Winterfell as an isolated wife getting raped by her husband and having to hope for help from servants. George R.R. Martin considers rape off-limits for POV characters? Oh, of course he fucking would. Because being a POV character is a job for a subject, not an object, and as such, regardless of sex, the POV characters are all granted an honorary masculine gender. They live their lives in the active voice, and in the active voice, as we all know, Mr. Morton is the subject of the sentence, and what the predicate says, he does. But rape is such an extraordinarily feminizing event that people who are raped, men and women alike, must be fixed forever into gender mode feminine, irrevocably transformed from grammatical subject to grammatical object. How could it be otherwise? They failed to eschew the passive voice -- something was done to them -- and now what the predicate says is no longer what they're the ones doing. And that's just not on for a POV character with whom we're supposed to identify, amirite, Mr. Morton? Er, I mean Mr. Martin? Whatever. Martin's gender issues would probably make for a doorstopper of their own, but I'm not sure why the television show should feel the need to ape all of those same screwed-up ideas, nor do I see why any of its viewers should. Rape is a fundamental part of the human experience for a huge number of people in this world, men and women and children, and each and every one of those people considers themselves--rightly!--the protagonist of their own story. They are not incapable of action, and they have plenty of agency. None of the things they have learned over the years has been erased. Their psychological development has not been revoked. Whatever GRRM has said about not writing POV rapes, in addition to the scenes from Dany's early marriage and Cersei's memories of Robert's visits to her, he has also written a rape scene from the POV of the rapist: Tyrion's rape of the sex slave in ADWD. Which, surprise surprise, didn't end up on GOT. The show isn't more intelligent or realistic than ASOIAF for adding random rape scenes with no fallout for female characters while feverishly trying to rewrite Tyrion's consistently dodgy treatment of women to make him a modern gentleman since it can't tolerate gritty realism that's applied universally. Nothing about the statements from people involved with the show or its past treatment of rape/nudity has convinced me that this is about anything but getting sexy controversy while shying away from realistic treatment of rape: realism would mean devoting screentime to a variety of emotional responses and admitting that living in a shitty society doesn't just mean adding rape for women but recognizing that your male fave has taken advantage of ways in which that shittiness enables him to get sex from unwilling women. At least GRRM admits that people who are capable of decency can be caught up in this system and become abusers. GOT, on the other hand, doesn't see it as in any way relevant to the characters of Tywin and Tyrion that they were involved in rapes, turns its unfavorite Jaime into a rapist (for one episode, then it returns to wooby oathkeeper Jaime) because his book objections to rape say nothing about him, and adds rape scenes for women without that changing their character development. In short, rapists aren't held accountable for what they've done and rape victims get over it quickly, because ultimately it doesn't matter. That's a more callous, dismissive attitude than GRRM's. Instead of improving GRRM, as I argue they did by cutting plots like Aegon and probably getting Dany and Tyrion to meet sooner, in this matter they've chosen to out-sleaze him by selectively adding more casual rape into major characters' plots while cutting the rape that was too realistic in its illustration of the miseries of slavery and Tyrion's lowest point. There were no consequences to the Jaime/Cersei rape. The showrunners could have gotten a story out of that if they wanted to, with the rape driving Jaime and Cersei further apart, especially if she connects it to Robert's treatment of her, so that Jaime's quest to save Myrcella and prove himself would have more weight. But the rape existed solely for the purpose of that one scene. Acting like rape has zero effect (Cersei) or leads to one episode of crying (Dany and, I'm predicting, Sansa) before it's forgotten is not a tribute to the survivors' agency. It's just a way to have your cake and eat it too: "It's realistic! But they're strong women!" The show gets the hype, the acclaim from the "pervert side" of the audience, and can act like it never happened after a couple of comments defending the scene with talk about realism and choices. I wish the total fail of the Sand Snakes had been the big thing about this episode, because at least it seems to have united the fandom and wouldn't have involved social media being flooded with endless victim-blaming and mockery of rape's emotional consequences. The fight choreography is starting to look so bad it's good. 5 Link to comment
Avaleigh May 24, 2015 Share May 24, 2015 (edited) Tyrion's consistently dodgy treatment of women to make him a modern gentleman since it can't tolerate gritty realism that's applied universally. If they'd included Tyrion's rape of the slave then I feel sure that there would be more complaints from viewers who don't want to see anymore rape being depicted in the series and that this would be more proof that the showrunners are trying to satisfy a certain unsavory part of the fan base. I'd be shocked if most viewers would want to see show Tyrion turned into a rapist for the sake of so-called gritty realism. I personally was disgusted with Tyrion in ADWD and am glad that they toned it down. I agree with the Shae criticisms with Tyrion but I can't get behind wanting to see Tyrion raping a slave when it would have no relevance to the plot. Sansa's marriage to Ramsay though feels like her plot is continuing to move forward especially now with Stannis marching on Winterfell. In short, rapists aren't held accountable for what they've done and rape victims get over it quickly, because ultimately it doesn't matter. The rapists at Craster's were held accountable. Drogo wasn't held accountable in the books so I didn't expect it to happen in the show. Ramsay will be held accountable IMO it just hasn't happened yet. The show simply does not have time to get into the emotional fall out of the women from Craster's. I also feel like the viewers aren't necessarily being given enough credit for already understanding that rape is a big deal and that there are indeed huge consequences for it and on multiple levels. I think there was no fallout from the Jaime and Cersei rape scene because the official word that was given was that it wasn't written or played by the actors as a rape scene. Of course it was a rape scene but if they're claiming that it isn't then that explains why there was no fall out. Acting like rape has zero effect (Cersei) or leads to one episode of crying (Dany and, I'm predicting, Sansa) before it's forgotten is not a tribute to the survivors' agency. I disagree that the show has portrayed rape as having zero effect on Cersei. It couldn't be more clear to me that she's seething with anger and resentment when she talks about basically being like a horse of Robert's to be ridden whenever he desired. I thought it was a huge part of the reason she hated him in the show and in the books. With Jaime, again, officially there was no rape so this one doesn't apply. (Obviously though we're in agreement that it happened.) With Dany on the show she felt she had no options than to try to learn to enjoy it. She tried to take control of her life and not only that but she had empathy for other rape victims and people being enslaved and IMO it's because she knows what it means to be bought and sold and raped. I don't think the rape of Dany was ignored or didn't help develop her character. Edited May 24, 2015 by Avaleigh 3 Link to comment
benteen May 24, 2015 Share May 24, 2015 Not only the raping but they cut stuff like Tyrion slapping Shae across the face for angering him. There's been a consistent campaign by D&D to eliminate any trace of questionable or unlikeable behavior from Tyrion while making other characters worse. I don't need to see Tyrion the rapist (and especially don't need to see Jaime the rapist) but they have made Tyrion's character remarkably one-dimensional. It's only the work of Peter Dinklage that has made Tyrion so memorable. 2 Link to comment
Advance35 May 24, 2015 Share May 24, 2015 (edited) Right. That being said, you still have no idea if Sansa is going to have a horrible wedding night with Harry. For all we know Sansa could end up dealing with something horrible during her time in the Vale. How do we know she isn't victimized again? How do we know she isn't rescued by some man in the books? How do we know she's only going to have wins from here on out? How do we know she isn't going to come up against sexual assault? How do we know that she won't still end up in difficult circumstances at Winterfell? For all we know D&D might have cut to the chase as far as bringing Sansa to Winterfell sooner rather than later. This is it in a nutshell. Nobody has provided proof that Sansa doesn't suffer something similar with Harry the Heir. People don't forsee it, some think it's unlikely, but they don't know. They have only speculation. GRRM has spoken out before about things the show runners should have included, if Sansa's virginity was a key plot point in her endgame I'm confident he would have said something by now. He hasn't given any additional spoilers about Sansa except that she's going to become more flirtatious. They neutered the scene with the Hound in Season 2, the nixed the scene between Marillion and her in Season 4, I just can't go with this idea that the show runners get off on abuse to the Sansa character. And can you imagine what would have happened if the show runners had included Jeyne Poole a perfect stranger sucking up screen time from Dany, Jon, Arya, Tyrion, KL and etc. Many parts of fandom frothed at the mouth over the screen time that was given to Ros and Shae. Not only the raping but they cut stuff like Tyrion slapping Shae across the face for angering him. There's been a consistent campaign by D&D to eliminate any trace of questionable or unlikeable behavior from Tyrion while making other characters worse. I don't need to see Tyrion the rapist (and especially don't need to see Jaime the rapist) but they have made Tyrion's character remarkably one-dimensional. It's only the work of Peter Dinklage that has made Tyrion so memorable. That's how I feel about Cersei. This version of the character has been completely declawed. Roberts Bastards in S2 and now we've yet to see her give victims to Quyburn for his experiments. She just locked up the High Septon instead of having him smothered. I don't think Kings Landing is as tense as it should be, in the book Cersei is so dangerous it's palatable. Edited May 24, 2015 by Advance35 Link to comment
sunflower May 24, 2015 Share May 24, 2015 (edited) There's been a consistent campaign by D&D to eliminate any trace of questionable or unlikeable behavior from Tyrion while making other characters worse. The Jamie and Tyrion throughline is the perfect story comparison because Jamie is the character who gets a literal redemption arc that got upended by D&D's changing of his story. He killed his cousin?! He raped, not raped Cersei? He's in Dorne instead of the Riverlands, doing boring lame shit. I believe when having to choose my favorite overall character, I always choose Jamie, book and show. Interestingly, I love Book Bran, the ending of A Clash of Kings, my favorite. The show screwed up Jamie's arc by the elements of whitewashing both Tyrion and Cersei. In the books,Tyrion is gray and I like him. I don't dislike Book Tyrion at all. OTOH, I despise Book Cersei and find her to be a moronic asshole, but that's the character. TV Cersei just comes across as weakly written at times because they're not giving her her true book story. Of the three siblings, i really believe Jamie is supposed to be the best person in a weird way despite pushing Bran out the window, the Mad King, and the incest. Doesn't his aunt basically say something about him being more like his uncles and not Tywin? Edited May 24, 2015 by sunflower 1 Link to comment
SeanC May 24, 2015 Share May 24, 2015 I personally was disgusted with Tyrion in ADWD You were supposed to be. That book is about exploring who Tyrion is at his lowest point. With Jaime, again, officially there was no rape so this one doesn't apply. (Obviously though we're in agreement that it happened.) The actors have said it wasn't a rape. The writers have said that it was, and even offered their artistic justification for why they changed it. Which may just be them covering their asses, but there you go. Link to comment
Boundary May 24, 2015 Share May 24, 2015 (edited) And can you imagine what would have happened if the show runners had included Jeyne Poole a perfect stranger sucking up screen time from Dany, Jon, Arya, Tyrion, KL and etc. Many parts of fandom frothed at the mouth over the screen time that was given to Ros and Shae. But Jeyne's screen time would also be Theon's. It's almost universally agreed that Theon's arc in ADWD is one of the best written in the whole series. And Alfie's performance would kill it, he would get his time to shine without Sansa's considerable shadow over the proceedings. This doesn't belittle Jeyne's rape, I believe that people making that argument are just diverting. The outrage over Jeyne's rape is reflected in Theon's redemption arc, if it wasn't that horrendous Theon's actions wouldn't have resonated. Sansa's rape however, the outrage needs to be specifically reflected in her own arc (as well as Theon's, which would have been diminished since saving Sansa is almost a requirement, whereas saving Jeyne was an act of selflessness and more heroism than expected). Edited May 24, 2015 by Boundary 1 Link to comment
benteen May 24, 2015 Share May 24, 2015 Alfie Allen should have gotten an Emmy nomination for his work in the second season. I felt when I read ADWD that if done right, the whole Reek storyline could be Emmy-material for him. I still feel that way though the writing has, as often been the case, been mixed at best. When the show "goes into business for itself" with original material, it's a mixed bag at best. The whitewashing is noticeable this season as it's Jaime on the show who wants to kill Tyrion and not the other way around as it was in the book. The funny thing is is that this season, Tyrion has been a little more closer to his book counterpart with his drunken moping. Jaime is my favorite character in the book as well, despite having done so many awful things and have some awful personality traits. I found his character and his storyline so damn compelling. After watching Season 1, I read all the books and found that NCW was the closest representation to his book counterpart in terms of performance and the vibe he gave off. 2 Link to comment
whirlingdervish May 24, 2015 Share May 24, 2015 You have to figure that they were likely watching her pretty heavily as soon as she arrived there. Getting married at least temporarily gives her some breathing space since I'd assume that they wouldn't take her as seriously once they have what they want from her. It's also likely that she underestimated Ramsey's depravity until it was too late. And/Or everyone overestimated the extent to which Ramsey's desire to be A Real [Noble-born] Boy would motivate him to keep it together so House Bolton can secure the north. We've seen several scenes at this point where Roose is dismayed by Ramsey's manners/table manners/inability to understand that you can't just fucking flay the entire North into loyalty. Holding out the carrot of legitimizing Ramsay may have been expedient in the short run, but it's really going to screw up House Bolton in the long run, because the heir is a psychopathic loose cannon who will be the first one against the wall when Stannis/the Wildlings/the White Walkers/Winter comes. Link to comment
Holmbo May 24, 2015 Share May 24, 2015 I think a problem with making show book comparisons this season is that the books are really like 90% set up. It's so hard to say where things are going. We really have just our assumption about what will turn out to be important and not. Earlier seasons I've enjoyed comparing the two but now it's not as interesting to me because I don't really know where they're going. On the topic of Tyrion adaption. I enjoy Tyrion a lot in the book but that's largely because of his inner monologue. If I don't get that I don't want the Tyrion book character. I think they made a good choice to change him in the show. Book readers might enjoy seeing this character on screen because they would know his thoughts from the books but show watchers would really dislike him IMO. 1 Link to comment
Elkins May 24, 2015 Share May 24, 2015 Honestly-it would have have been also horrifying if Ramsay had "made love" to her Yeah. That's what I was dreading with this plotline, actually. I was worried that Ramsay would play nice with her for a while, winning her over until she was off-guard and starting to relax, and then turn on her later For Teh Dramaz! The thing is, while I know that it may sound like I do sometimes, I really don't trust these writers, and I was stomach-churning over the idea that they might revert her all the way back to "Ha, ha! Sansa's still a stupid little girl who can be tricked into thinking evil men good!" I think at this point in the story, Sansa would either be off screen (as in the books) or be someone's wife and there aren't many consensual choices for her that forward the story. Someone else posted the idea of her ruling the North as a Virgin Queen, which is pretty brilliant. I would have loved that, but I guess there's a different end game. :nods: Part of the problem in evaluating the adaptation from here on out is that none of us knows the shape of the endgame. Does the fact that they've folded Sansa's plotline into the Winterfell story mean that she will be somehow reclaiming or attempting to reclaim Winterfell in the books? I'm guessing that's the case, but obviously I don't know for sure, and neither does anyone else here. I just have zero faith in the writers to handle this. That is perfectly fair. I have my own reasons (which I've probably gone into at far too great a length already) for approving of this particular adaptation choice, but there have been plenty of others that I've considered poor. So I can hardly object to your lack of faith in them. They have justly, and through their own efforts, earned that lack of faith. But I'm going back to lightening the mood and saying I'm going to see that song all day! Ugh, yeah, sorry about that. I woke up early this morning with it still stuck in my head and have been cursing myself furiously for it ever since. Even that Bumblebee Tuna commercial that I've had stuck in my brain for forty years has not sufficed to drive it out of there, and usually that one can override anything. Tenser, said the Tensor. Tenser, said the Tensor. Tension, apprehension and dissension have begun. I think even more puzzling than the focus on Sansa's virginity is the idea that she should have been able to say something to Ramsay or even Roose that would somehow have made her wedding night more tolerable. That, indeed, is the thing that's made me run the most hot and furious this week (as if it weren't obvious). To be fair, though, I don't think that's an argument any of the people still engaging with this thread have been making. Sean, Pete, and Boundary have different objections to the direction the writers have taken Sansa's story. I thought what Sansa was feeling and going through was the most powerful part of the scene. It was definitely more about what Sansa was going through IMO. I agree, and actually, I think a lot of the disagreement over the scene comes down to this very question, which is far more subjective on film than it is in prose. I saw the scene as told primarily from Sansa's POV, and only secondarily from Theon's, so I didn't read it as a fridging situation where the victim's perspective was erased in favor of a male protagonist's ManPain. Instead, I saw it as a much-needed corrective to some of the more problematic aspects of the source material. Unfortunately, though, I'm not educated in film analysis, so I don't have the grounding or the vocabulary to explain what it was about the way the scene was filmed that makes me reject that reading. (Maybe I should take some classes or something, actually, because I'm finding being in this situation both immensely frustrating and surprisingly distressing.) But anyway, yeah, I imagine that if I had read the scene the way that some of those who are angry about it have described themselves reading it, I'd probably be frothing right alongside them. ElizaD: You make some really good points there. I can't argue with the fact that they have removed a lot of rapiness from Tyrion's story. In general, I think they've significantly lightened up all of the characters. Personally, I think that's improved the antagonists tremendously (I really dislike the lack of nuance in Martin's villains), but it's also taken a lot of the bite out of the work as a whole. And I would agree with you that Tyrion is the character who has been the most dramatically bleached, although Cersei would run a close second. What I'm not sure about is whether a show hewing closer to the original in that respect could really have succeeded. As it stands, I hear people complain all the time about the villains being too one-dimensionally villainous and the story lacking sympathetic characters (and each time I do I think, 'oh, boy, you'd just love the books then'). Combine that with the fact that many people find things far more visceral in a visual medium... I just don't know. Maybe it still would have worked, but I think chances are good that it would have put people right off. I'm not sure I'm willing to call that tonal shift a cowardly decision, rather than a prudent one. But then, I had a severe case of Eight Deadly Words with the books, so maybe I'm a poor judge of such things. Whatever happens to Sansa in the books, and I don't think it'll all be smooth sailing, I doubt she will repeat Jeyne's storyline of being raped by Ramsay, a character who exists to outdo all the sadistic sickos GRRM had previously written about. Here we get into an issue that has so far gone unraised, I think, which is that Ramsay...well, he kind of sucks as a character. He's a stock type (over-the-top sadistic serial killer with a penchant for mind fucks) that had already become played out by the end of the '90s, after Thomas Harris had made everyone want to do their own version, and is now well and truly tired. The only twist on the type is that he's wandering around a quasi-medieval setting, rather than thwarting the FBI. I really wish Martin had not gone to that well in the first place, but he did, and I guess the show has to deal with that somehow. But I do wish they'd changed it up somehow, not only because of the sexual violence issue, but also because the immediate response just about every show-only watcher I know has to Ramsay is a big "Oh. He's one of those" eyeroll. At least GRRM admits that people who are capable of decency can be caught up in this system and become abusers. True dat. And a very good point. It's best not to lose sight of the fact that the choice between Benioff & Weiss's oblivious dudebroness and GRRM's sleaze-revelling nerdrage is a false dilemma of the first degree. I wish the total fail of the Sand Snakes had been the big thing about this episode, because at least it seems to have united the fandom and wouldn't have involved social media being flooded with endless victim-blaming and mockery of rape's emotional consequences. Something we can all agree on! Er...I hope. Link to comment
Oscirus May 24, 2015 Share May 24, 2015 (edited) Yea there are somethings in the book that Tyrion wouldn't be able to overcome if he did them on the show. For example, I doubt he could recover from molesting young Sansa on their wedding night before ultimately turning her down. In a world like this your tertiary protagonist can be complex but he shouldn't be gray enough to the point where he's closer to black. In all of the controversy, there were some big developments missed. Coconspirators Oleana and Littlefinger are now together in the same place and Oleana once again has a reason to be mad at the Lannisters. I doubt that Littlefinger won't find a way to manipulate that to his advantage. Arya just had her first kill that wasn't in self defense. And we just saw the beginning of the spread on the grey scale virus. I'm also pretty sure that Jorah gave his "I'm going to die speech." If we couple that with the worry over Bronn's wounds, that could be the four deaths not in the books that Martin hinted at. On a stranger note, Adebesi would debut on this episode. Edited May 24, 2015 by Oscirus Link to comment
Silje May 24, 2015 Share May 24, 2015 Whatever happens to Sansa in the books, and I don't think it'll all be smooth sailing, I doubt she will repeat Jeyne's storyline of being raped by Ramsay, a character who exists to outdo all the sadistic sickos GRRM had previously written about. I don't believe that Book Sansa will undergo a similarly horrible marital rape: the more likely possibility is that the showrunners wanted to include the Ramsay/Theon/Jeyne storyline they liked and just changed the victim without caring about anything in Sansa's story/character other than that, I would now predict, she eventually returns North when her Vale plot has played out? Marriage to Ramsay is a complete failure that gets her nothing: she abandoned the safety and untouched army of the Vale, its malleable child-lord, and the virginity that was an asset on the marriage alliance market for the taint of association with the hated, doomed Boltons and the mere chance that maybe Stannis will attack Winterfell when she and random peasant servants can stab the guards at the gate or something. She won't gain any power by being in Winterfell as an isolated wife getting raped by her husband and having to hope for help from servants. This. Love your whole post, ElizaD, but I just had to single out this because it's like you've read my mind about what's bothering me about what they've done with Sansa this season. 1 Link to comment
ElizaD May 24, 2015 Share May 24, 2015 If they'd included Tyrion's rape of the slave then I feel sure that there would be more complaints from viewers who don't want to see anymore rape being depicted in the series and that this would be more proof that the showrunners are trying to satisfy a certain unsavory part of the fan base. I'd be shocked if most viewers would want to see show Tyrion turned into a rapist for the sake of so-called gritty realism. I personally was disgusted with Tyrion in ADWD and am glad that they toned it down. I think there was no fallout from the Jaime and Cersei rape scene because the official word that was given was that it wasn't written or played by the actors as a rape scene. Of course it was a rape scene but if they're claiming that it isn't then that explains why there was no fall out. I actually think the slave rape stood out because it wasn't like the shocks and extreme edginess that we tend to get in tales about Gregor or Ramsay. It was like a scene from those low-budget dramas that portray everyday life as realistically and depressingly as possible, with no cinematic tricks to spice up what's going on: there was no pleasure in the act, no energy to be found in either the self-loathing rapist or the victim who'd become resigned to her life, and the whole situation was full of this mundane, weary ugliness. In a way, it felt like the perfect scene for the inclusion of a rape that couldn't delight the creeps in the audience: there was nothing shocking about it, nothing titillating, it simply showed Tyrion at his lowest point in a way that didn't have the grandeur or wish-fulfillment of the kind of villain moments people are drawn to because even though those characters are evil, they are in charge and do what they like without having to care about what others say. The explanations about Jaime/Cersei were a mess, with the director saying one thing and the showrunners another. Whatever the original idea was, I feel that the execution must have been made worse by miscommunication. Alfie Allen should have gotten an Emmy nomination for his work in the second season. I felt when I read ADWD that if done right, the whole Reek storyline could be Emmy-material for him. Alfie's season 2 is still one of my favorite GOT performances (perhaps the favorite for the way it made me love a story I never cared about) and I've been posting for years about how I much I looked forward to his seeing ADWD plot onscreen. Such an opportunity, yet now it will be remembered for Sansa's rape. What I'm not sure about is whether a show hewing closer to the original in that respect could really have succeeded. As it stands, I hear people complain all the time about the villains being too one-dimensionally villainous and the story lacking sympathetic characters (and each time I do I think, 'oh, boy, you'd just love the books then'). Combine that with the fact that many people find things far more visceral in a visual medium... I just don't know. Maybe it still would have worked, but I think chances are good that it would have put people right off. I'm not sure I'm willing to call that tonal shift a cowardly decision, rather than a prudent one. But then, I had a severe case of Eight Deadly Words with the books, so maybe I'm a poor judge of such things. Here we get into an issue that has so far gone unraised, I think, which is that Ramsay...well, he kind of sucks as a character. He's a stock type (over-the-top sadistic serial killer with a penchant for mind fucks) that had already become played out by the end of the '90s, after Thomas Harris had made everyone want to do their own version, and is now well and truly tired. The only twist on the type is that he's wandering around a quasi-medieval setting, rather than thwarting the FBI. I really wish Martin had not gone to that well in the first place, but he did, and I guess the show has to deal with that somehow. But I do wish they'd changed it up somehow, not only because of the sexual violence issue, but also because the immediate response just about every show-only watcher I know has to Ramsay is a big "Oh. He's one of those" eyeroll. IMO, the show probably wouldn't be as successful if it wasn't so black and white and easy to digest once the viewer gets used to the massive cast, but I do think it would be possible to push the boundaries more than is done. To me GOT is above all, and even more so than ASOIAF, an epic soap with its emphasis on twists, secrets and character interaction. When it does that well it's great soapy fun, but it's such a shame that it's including rape as drama, one of the dodgiest soap cliches, when it won't devote time to exploring it with the kind of thoroughness and honesty that soaps at least try to make their goal when tackling rape storylines these days. I agree that Ramsay is tiresome. It's like GRRM wanted a gruesome villain who would top the fan favorite twist of Gregor confessing to Elia's rape before killing her seemingly victorious brother. I may despise the great leader and misunderstood woobie interpretations of Tywin and Tyrion but I can see how they came about because those are complex characters who have things they are very good at and moments of vulnerability that explain their actions. But Ramsay is a non-character. There's nothing there except dwelling on atrocities. He seems to exist for the hype of "what line will he cross next?!" and I find that tedious, predictable and off-putting in a way that Tywin never was. I cheered Tywin's death, but before that he had countless good and varied scenes with the rest of the cast. Ramsay inspires nothing expect the hope that this murder clown will get off the screen. 1 Link to comment
SeanC May 24, 2015 Share May 24, 2015 (edited) Here we get into an issue that has so far gone unraised, I think, which is that Ramsay...well, he kind of sucks as a character. He's a stock type (over-the-top sadistic serial killer with a penchant for mind fucks) that had already become played out by the end of the '90s, after Thomas Harris had made everyone want to do their own version, and is now well and truly tired. The only twist on the type is that he's wandering around a quasi-medieval setting, rather than thwarting the FBI. I really wish Martin had not gone to that well in the first place, but he did, and I guess the show has to deal with that somehow. But I do wish they'd changed it up somehow, not only because of the sexual violence issue, but also because the immediate response just about every show-only watcher I know has to Ramsay is a big "Oh. He's one of those" eyeroll. I've talked about this subject a few times over in the thread on adaptation, and in general I've liked the show's version of Ramsay more, because Rheon brings a bit of levity to the part that is wholly absent from the book version. Toning Ramsay down a bit goes a long way, as he's not one of the GRRM's more inspired creations, and in general the creative impetus behind him in any given scene appears to be "what's the worst thing Ramsay could say or do in this scene? Do that." You could say the same thing about Joffrey, to a great extent, but Joffrey, while one-dimensional, brought out a lot more interesting interactions with various characters than Ramsay has done. Edited May 24, 2015 by SeanC 2 Link to comment
Avaleigh May 24, 2015 Share May 24, 2015 You were supposed to be. That book is about exploring who Tyrion is at his lowest point. The actors have said it wasn't a rape. The writers have said that it was, and even offered their artistic justification for why they changed it. Which may just be them covering their asses, but there you go. I don't know that people are supposed to have any specific interpretation of the books but, leaving that aside, I should clarify that I was disgusted with Tyrion *and* his storyline in ADWD. It wasn't just the rape of the slave as horrible as that was. It was how boring I felt his chapters were when I'd once found them to be riveting. Between the drinking, the vomiting, the shaking off the last drops, the fantasizing about Septa Lemore, the desire to rape Cersei, the endless moaning about 'where do whores go?'--I was over it pretty early on in ADWD so I'm thankful that the show didn't send him into the same place because to me this didn't make for a more entertaining story. It dragged and dragged and dragged some more IMO. I don't need characters to be likable or rootworthy in order to feel interested or entertained by them. I'm also the last person to complain about anything getting too dark. I'm all about bringing on the darkness so long as it's a good story and actually makes sense in terms of what's already been established. It definitely isn't a fear of the show getting too dark or one of the lead characters no longer being likable that makes me glad that the showrunners have decided to modify the character of Tyrion in certain areas. As far as the idea that there wouldn't have been anything shocking about having Tyrion rape a slave--I guess we have to agree to disagree there. I feel like the outcry from viewers would have been similar to the outcry that we've been seeing for the past week. I particularly think that the Unsullied viewers would have been furious. Truthfully, I've never seen rape on this show not be objected to by numerous viewers every time one has been included, so I highly doubt that it would be any different for Tyrion. The whitewashing is noticeable this season as it's Jaime on the show who wants to kill Tyrion and not the other way around as it was in the book. The funny thing is is that this season, Tyrion has been a little more closer to his book counterpart with his drunken moping. One change that I think is significant is the fact that show Tyrion isn't as disfigured as book Tyrion is these days. (I think this choice is totally understandable btw. It's time consuming and expensive and isn't necessary at the end of the day.) The loss of his nose hit Tyrion hard IMO because he thinks he's harder to look at than ever and almost seems like he feels that he should play the part of a monster now that his face looks so gruesome and scary to people. Didn't he basically delight in frightening some kid by making faces at her and making her cry? I mean, this is the level he was working on in ADWD. Tyrion went from holding his own with some of the most dangerous and powerful people in Westeros to scaring kids for shits and giggles, watching turtles, and talking to anybody who will listen about how he hopes that he'll be able to rape his sister one day. Lol, it's totally easy for me to understand why they didn't have Tyrion go down this path especially when I think about how sensitive viewers can be in general. 1 Link to comment
benteen May 25, 2015 Share May 25, 2015 Yeah, I don't blame them for not disfiguring Tyrion's face for a lot of reasons. Just about every ugly character is better looking than their book counterparts (Jorah springs to mind) but I'm fine with that too. I guess most producers would figure that people don't really want to watch a show full of ugly people. ;) 1 Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.