Season 6: Speculation

[Eyes High]

1 hour ago, Chris24601 said:

I wouldn't take that particular play as anything that will last... it's basically GOT's version of the "Ember Island Players" and will probably go the same way once the Baratheon-in-name-only dynasty collapses and is replaced by either Dany (with Tyrion as her Hand) or Jon.

History is rife with such propaganda pieces that are forgotten within a fortnight.

Richard III would disagree, I think. In the books at least, the theatre troupe's play appears to have been inspired by Shakespeare's Richard III, a play that was most decidedly not forgotten "within a fortnight" and whose portrayal of Richard III as a deformed, Machiavellian villain seems to have proven extremely influential as to the historical figure was popularly seen by later generations.

Back on point, though, Sansa's reputation does seem pretty terrible in the books and in the show. In the books, it's rumoured that she transformed into a winged wolf to flee after Joffrey's death after killing him with a spell. The "official" story in the books and the show as revealed by Shae's testimony is that Sansa conspired with Tyrion to murder Joffrey. In the show, Lyanna Mormont offers only a skeptical "If you say so" to Sansa's insistence that she'll always be a Stark, and Lord Glover spits in her face that the "Starks are dead," suggesting he doesn't acknowledge her as a Stark. Maybe the North will be more welcoming once Ramsay's out of the picture and the Starks are large and in charge, but it seems the only place where TV Sansa was truly welcomed as herself was the Vale.

I have yet to see any evidence that TV Sansa has blossomed into a great player. Is it that she's not intended to come across as a great player? Is the writing failing her and making her look like a failure as a player to serve the plot? Bit of both?

Edited June 17, 2016 by Eyes High

[SeanC]

10 minutes ago, Eyes High said:

Richard III would disagree, I think. In the books at least, the theatre troupe's play appears to have been inspired by Shakespeare's Richard III, a play that was most decidedly not forgotten "within a fortnight" and whose portrayal of Richard III as a deformed, Machiavellian villain seems to have proven extremely influential as to the historical figure was popularly seen by later generations.

Well, yeah, but the Tudor dynasty and its successors were invested in that version of Richard, and past that point, it was simply an indelible work of literature.  Chris24601's point was that once the Baratheon (or "Baratheon") dynasty is gone, it's unlikely anybody is going to have an interest in propping up Joff's good name.  How all our main characters will be remembered is going to be a lot more dependent on what happens in the next few seasons, who ends up in charge when it's over, etc.

[AliShibaz]

In the next episode (S06E09) I'm hoping to finally see Ramsay get what he deserves. Unfortunately, it's very hard to predict just what is the Showrunner's opinion when it comes to what he deserves. I'm a very vindictive type of person and so I'd like to see him suffer the sum total of the pain that he has caused others over the years.

Unfortunately, on this show, the audience doesn't seem to get to see the victims of violence savor the suffering of wrongdoers. In other words, I would very much like to see Sansa and Theon present when Ramsay gets his due. But, as it stands, they are not together (geographically) and if Ramsay is put to the sword during the upcoming battle, it would seem doubtful they will both be present so they can witness his death.

If Ramsay is captured and tried for his "crimes against humanity" or "waging aggressive war", is there any penalty the courts in that place and time will sentence him to anything worse than beheading? If it's done right, wouldn't he deserve to be flayed alive? After all, it seems he has done that to many others and it might seem only fair for him to suffer the same fate. However, in an enlightened society, flaying people would certainly seem to be a barbaric practice.

So can the courts justify beheading to the relatives of people who Ramsay flayed? When they appeal to the courts and say they want to see Ramsay suffer the same kind of pain - both in intensity and duration - that Ramsay gave their relatives, how does a court deny them? Seems to me they really need to do more than just label the practice as "barbaric". Sad to say, I just can't imagine what any court of law could say that would make the victims or relatives of victims feel any better.

Edited June 17, 2016 by AliShibaz

[kittykat]

5 hours ago, Chris24601 said:

I wouldn't take that particular play as anything that will last... it's basically GOT's version of the "Ember Island Players" and will probably go the same way once the Baratheon-in-name-only dynasty collapses and is replaced by either Dany (with Tyrion as her Hand) or Jon.

History is rife with such propaganda pieces that are forgotten within a fortnight. There's no money to be made in making villains of the current authorities and, depending on the ruler, could lead to an unfortunate audience where body parts are removed for said authority's entertainment.

LOL!  When I first saw the scene with the play my first thought was Avatar's Ember Island Players.  If only ActorNed had shouted "HONNOOOORRRR" before being beheaded.

35 minutes ago, AliShibaz said:

So can the courts justify beheading to the relatives of people who Ramsay flayed? When they appeal to the courts and say they want to see Ramsay suffer the same kind of pain - both in intensity and duration - that Ramsay gave their relatives, how does a court deny them? Seems to me they really need to do more than just label the practice as "barbaric". Sad to say, I just can't imagine what any court of law could say that would make the victims or relatives of victims feel any better.

I have three scenarios for Ramsay's impending death.

1.  He gets fed to his dogs/Ghost chow! (My personal preference)

2. Jon beheads him. (The most likely outcome because of the whole "man who passes the sentence...")

3.  Littlefinger kills him in a prison cell before trial chiding him a disappoint and a "bad investment" (we know how LF feels about his bad investments lest we forget Ros)

[Chris24601]

2 hours ago, kittykat said:

LOL!  When I first saw the scene with the play my first thought was Avatar's Ember Island Players.  If only ActorNed had shouted "HONNOOOORRRR" before being beheaded.

And now I want a Avatar/Kora-style retelling of GoT. Obviously, you'd have to leave out some of the mature themes, but some version of at least the Stark kids' stories could probably be adapted to such a thing (Dany's story just has too many mature themes in the first book for me to see it being adaptable... maybe if you started it with Dany hatching her dragons and deciding to go free the slaves or something you could work it).

[Hecate7]

On 6/17/2016 at 10:37 AM, Chris24601 said:

I wouldn't take that particular play as anything that will last... it's basically GOT's version of the "Ember Island Players" and will probably go the same way once the Baratheon-in-name-only dynasty collapses and is replaced by either Dany (with Tyrion as her Hand) or Jon.

History is rife with such propaganda pieces that are forgotten within a fortnight. There's no money to be made in making villains of the current authorities and, depending on the ruler, could lead to an unfortunate audience where body parts are removed for said authority's entertainment.

The Starks are not the current authorities. In Essos, neither are the Lannisters. The play was meant to boldly contrast the public sentiment, and what people in that world "know," with what the audience knows. Otherwise why spend so much time on it?

The Stark kids are standing where Viserys used to be. They think the world is with them, infuriated about the injustices perpetrated against their family, horrified by the Red Wedding and Ned Stark's execution, just as Viserys and Danaerys thought the world was lobbying for them to return to their rightful home. But really, nobody but the Starks cares that much if there's a Stark in Winterfell, just as nobody but Viserys really cared about having a Targaryen on the Iron Throne. The Red Wedding is like the murder of Elia Targaryen's kids--an awful thing but what's done is done. A few family members hunger for revenge, but the world at large has moved on. Similarly, Ned's execution is like the murder of the Mad King--horrible, but didn't he bring it on himself? People sneer at Walder Frey the way they sneered at Jaime, but not many are crying for their blood in the streets.

The play reflects the current official narrative, the one likeliest to become history, just like Richard III, which it transparently resembles. Only a few mad "conspiracy theorists" still imagine Tyrion or Sansa might be innocent of Joffrey's murder. Only a few crazy people and a few insiders who know the truth about Joffrey or still give any credence to Stannis' letter or see anything in Ned's behavior beyond simple betrayal and treason. We're so used to the insider narrative we forget that not even most of King's Landing knows what we know.

[RedheadZombie]

On ‎6‎/‎11‎/‎2016 at 4:28 PM, paigow said:

Yes. It would unite them all in a fiery death scene...

How about several thousand Dothraki & Unsullied?

(Quote moved from Spoilers thread)

This comment was in response to mine stating my interest in seeing Brienne serving Dany, and my opinion you couldn't find a more loyal protector.  And I think, IMO only, that Brienne would still be superior.  Who knows how the Dothraki will respond the first time Dany tells this rape-happy bunch that rape is forbidden.  It's what ultimately led to Drogo's death.  They also only follow strength, so the first moment she appears weak, many will abandon her.

I think the Unsullied are very devoted to her - as they were very devoted to their slave masters before her.  Some, like Grey Worm, have moved on from the slave mentality they were born with, but I'm sure some worship her simply for striking their chains.  I think they would die for her without a second thought, and I think they are wonderful protectors.  But the greatest of that bunch, Grey Worm, seems to be lining up to be left behind as a leader of Mereen.  So he may be out of the equation of Dany's protector.

My original comment was that I would love, if Dany ends up ruling, for Brienne to be a member of her Queensguard.  Brienne seems to love the whole romanticism of knights and oaths of honor, and takes her oaths to women as seriously as her oaths to men.  And when she's pledged her oath, it's non-negotiable.  She's also a fully empowered woman who does what she does because she wants to.  She comes from wealth and could return to that life whenever she wants to.  And since she suffers from unrequited love and seems to be unwilling to give Tormund a chance, a life of celibacy seems to be acceptable to her.  And I would love to see Brienne given the honor of guarding Dany, and being considered the ultimate protector. 

The comment was more girl power! than an attack on the boy's club.

[Chris24601]

55 minutes ago, Hecate7 said:

The play reflects the current official narrative, the one likeliest to become history, just like Richard III, which it transparently resembles.

Except the story's not over. Do you really think this narrative will stay official or become history if House "Baratheon" and Lannister completely collapse and Jon ends up the King of Westeros (or even just the Northern half of Westeros) or if Queen Daenerys succeeds and keeps Tyrion on as her Hand?

History is written by the winners and the Lannisters are staged to lose it all.

[SeanC]

1 hour ago, Hecate7 said:

The play reflects the current official narrative, the one likeliest to become history, just like Richard III, which it transparently resembles. 

"Current official narrative" being the operative word, seeing as the current regime is doomed to fall and be replaced by forces far less sympathetic to its memory, whoever those people are.

[Eyes High]

29 minutes ago, SeanC said:

"Current official narrative" being the operative word, seeing as the current regime is doomed to fall and be replaced by forces far less sympathetic to its memory, whoever those people are.

It seems clear to me that GRRM was pointing to Shakespeare's Richard III with "The Bloody Hand," aka a play which formed the near-indelible popular view of the historical Richard III as a deformed, power-mad villain. Arguing that the ASOIAF/GOT play is in truth more comparable to historical propaganda that will be forgotten when a regime change occurs because The Bloody Hand is contemporaneous (as opposed to Shakespeare's Richard III, which was written many years after the events depicted) seems to me to be missing the point. It seems clear to me that GRRM wanted to invoke Richard III ("Tyrion's" speech in the play is clearly reminiscent of one of Richard III's), aka someone whose portrayal in fiction has become the most widely accepted "truth" among the public, even if it's at odds with historical truth. It seems to me that he wanted to invoke the idea of a fictional, popularly accepted reality completely at odds with historical truth. To quibble about the timing of the play's composition in relation to the events depicted in order to attempt to dispute the comparison again seems to me to be missing the forest for the trees.

One doesn't need to reference the play in either medium to assume that Sansa's name is mud in the South, though. (Sansa was a disgraced traitor's daughter in KL before Joffrey's death, and Cersei and Shae with an assist from LF and the Tyrells saw to it that she'd be condemned as Tyrion's accomplice after his death as well.) The surprise in the show universe is that her name also seems to be mud in the North.

Realistically, though, even if Jon or Dany wins the IT and officially exonerates Sansa and/or Tyrion of any part in Joffrey's death, they will likely always be remembered as Joffrey's murderers. Shae's not around to recant. Littlefinger and the Tyrells will be dead before they have the opportunity to confess. The ink's already dry on the story of Joffrey's murder as far as the wider world is concerned, and even though it's not the real story, it's sufficiently compelling--like Shakespeare's Richard III--for the truth not to matter very much.

Edited June 18, 2016 by Eyes High

[SeanC]

45 minutes ago, Eyes High said:

It seems clear to me that GRRM was pointing to Shakespeare's Richard III with "The Bloody Hand," aka a play which formed the near-indelible popular view of the historical Richard III as a deformed, power-mad villain. Arguing that the ASOIAF/GOT play is in truth more comparable to historical propaganda that will be forgotten when a regime change occurs because The Bloody Hand is contemporaneous (as opposed to Shakespeare's Richard III, which was written many years after the events depicted) seems to me to be missing the point. It seems clear to me that GRRM wanted to invoke Richard III ("Tyrion's" speech in the play is clearly reminiscent of one of Richard III's), aka someone whose portrayal in fiction has become the most widely accepted "truth" among the public, even if it's at odds with historical truth. It seems to me that he wanted to invoke the idea of a fictional, popularly accepted reality completely at odds with historical truth. To quibble about the timing of the play's composition in relation to the events depicted in order to attempt to dispute the comparison again seems to me to be missing the forest for the trees.

"The Bloody Hand" in the books is indeed a very obvious Richard III parallel, and it's the current story in as told by the Baratheon regime, and thus distributed elsewhere.  My point is simply that it's implausible to argue that this is thus unavoidably how the people involved will be remembered going forward, since the political climate is going to markedly change in the coming seasons, let alone what happens after.  The history of a Westeros under, e.g., a revived Targaryen monarchy will be told very differently than it is now (not even necessarily more true on the whole, but differently); same as the history of the north would be very different under King Jon or King Bran or whoever than if Ramsay stayed in charge.  If Tyrion becomes a dragonrider, Hand of the Queen, long-time Lord of Casterly Rock, helps save the realm, etc., his place in history will be very different than what it is now.

Quote

One doesn't need to reference the play in either medium to assume that Sansa's name is mud in the South, though.

In parts of the south.  Not in the Vale, as we've seen (indeed, the Stark name seems to be more popular in the Vale than in the North, as the show tells it).

Quote

Realistically, though, even if Jon or Dany wins the IT and officially exonerates Sansa and/or Tyrion of any part in Joffrey's death, they will likely always be remembered as Joffrey's murderers.

Quite possible.  But if Joffrey is a tyrant rather than the noblest boy who ever lived, that's a very different story than the one the play told, for instance, and I doubt the histories as written under Dany or Jon would have much that was nice to be said about him.

Edited June 18, 2016 by SeanC

[Maximum Taco]

1 hour ago, Eyes High said:

Realistically, though, even if Jon or Dany wins the IT and officially exonerates Sansa and/or Tyrion of any part in Joffrey's death, they will likely always be remembered as Joffrey's murderers. Shae's not around to recant. Littlefinger and the Tyrells will be dead before they have the opportunity to confess. The ink's already dry on the story of Joffrey's murder as far as the wider world is concerned, and even though it's not the real story, it's sufficiently compelling--like Shakespeare's Richard III--for the truth not to matter very much.

True, but if Jon or Dany wins the Iron Throne Joff will likely be remembered as a tyrannical monster who not only plunged the Kingdoms into a war which nearly destroyed them, but delighted in ordering his Kingsguard to savage and beat his betrothed (not even having the wherewithal to do it himself) before ultimately discarding her and forcing her into a loveless marriage with a grotesque imp.

I don't see Tyrion's reputation ever recovering because even if he is cleared of wrongdoing in Joff's death (highly unlikely), he did still kill his father. He's clearly just a crazed dog who wants to wipe out all the legitimate heirs to the Lannister name.

But Sansa could easily be forgiven (perhaps even celebrated) for ridding the world of such a monster, maybe even more so if she is painted as the mastermind of the scheme. Because then not only did she rid the world of Joff, she very nearly organized Tyrion's downfall too.

Edited June 18, 2016 by Maximum Taco

[SeanC]

24 minutes ago, Maximum Taco said:

I don't see Tyrion's reputation ever recovering because even if he is cleared of wrongdoing in Joff's death (highly unlikely), he did still kill his father. 

Well, good news for him in the show, at least, since it appears kinslaying is no big deal there.

[Maximum Taco]

9 minutes ago, SeanC said:

Well, good news for him in the show, at least, since it appears kinslaying is no big deal there.

Everything that is horrible godfearing taboo in the books is NBD in the show.

Kinslaying? Everyone does that shit.

Kingslaying? Everyone does that shit too and only the guys who REALLY hate you bring it up with any frequency, everyone else mostly just ignores it.

Violating Guest Right? Everyone does that shit too and not even the guys who hate you bring it up a ton. People just ignore it for years and years. You really only need to fear retribution from the family that you killed (and even then some of them will totally forgive you), and really you probably should've had to fear retribution from them even if you killed them honourably.

The sacred and ancient right to trial by battle? Nope, let's get rid of that.

Edited June 18, 2016 by Maximum Taco

[Greta]

I agree on history being re-written depending on the ultimate victor, but I wonder if GRRM might be foreshadowing that Dragonqueen Dany's reign might be so terrible that Joffrey ends up with a good edit just because a) he wasn't around that long, b) much of his sadism and evil was contained to the Red Keep and King's Landing (two possibly extinct locations) albeit largely because of (a), and c) Crazy Tyrant Dany ends up being so bad that people long for the days of Good King Joffrey when at least being roasted and eaten by a dragon wasn't the go-to sentencing option.

[Hecate7]

4 hours ago, Chris24601 said:

Except the story's not over. Do you really think this narrative will stay official or become history if House "Baratheon" and Lannister completely collapse and Jon ends up the King of Westeros (or even just the Northern half of Westeros) or if Queen Daenerys succeeds and keeps Tyrion on as her Hand?

History is written by the winners and the Lannisters are staged to lose it all.

I never expect my favorite characters to live all the way through the book. I expect some giant flaming sacrifice of Tyrion by the end, some act of saving the world which doesn't change his depiction in the public imagination by as much as a single hair. I think the Lannisters will all be dead including him by the end, plus all the Starks save Arya, and Gendry Baratheon will most likely be seated on the Iron Throne. So yeah, I suspect that play will be how Tyrion and Sansa in particular are remembered by history. Even if Sansa lives on and has children and is Wardeness of the North, I suspect that people will continue to think of the Starks the way they are depicted in that play, unless Danaerys or Jon or Gendry decide to involve themselves a lot more closely in the propraganda world than I think they really would. Jon Snow isn't the type of king to cut out minstrel's tongues or censor playwrights. If the plays flattering him artistically eclipse the ones written to flatter Cersei, then sure, this one will fade and die, but this one is good and probably isn't going anywhere. It might get rewritten to flatter Tyrion or Sansa should they end up on the throne, but I doubt somehow that they will.

[Hecate7]

2 hours ago, Greta said:

I agree on history being re-written depending on the ultimate victor, but I wonder if GRRM might be foreshadowing that Dragonqueen Dany's reign might be so terrible that Joffrey ends up with a good edit just because a) he wasn't around that long, b) much of his sadism and evil was contained to the Red Keep and King's Landing (two possibly extinct locations) albeit largely because of (a), and c) Crazy Tyrant Dany ends up being so bad that people long for the days of Good King Joffrey when at least being roasted and eaten by a dragon wasn't the go-to sentencing option.

It could well be. But it's also meant to show us that since Joffrey's sadism and evil was contained to King's Landing, he's already getting a good edit. I think the most important line in this whole series was said to the Targ kids early on: "The common people pray for rain, health, and a summer that never ends. They don't care what games the high lords play." Because we love the Starks so much, we forget that that includes them, too.

[Hecate7]

3 hours ago, Maximum Taco said:

True, but if Jon or Dany wins the Iron Throne Joff will likely be remembered as a tyrannical monster who not only plunged the Kingdoms into a war which nearly destroyed them, but delighted in ordering his Kingsguard to savage and beat his betrothed (not even having the wherewithal to do it himself) before ultimately discarding her and forcing her into a loveless marriage with a grotesque imp.

 

Only if someone actually wrote down what Joff did. I don't think there are going to be any witnesses to the beating of Sansa or the circumstances of her marriage to the Imp. Jon wasn't there and he won't rewrite history to suit himself. Danaerys will leave the record as it is, because it all just shows how badly her intervention was needed. She's got no love for Starks or Lannisters, and so unless she becomes a good personal friend of Sansa, Sansa will be remembered as that character in that play about the Imp.

 

You know who's going to bother with the true story? Sam. If he lives, he'll write a dull and accurate version that only Maesters and conspiracy theory types will want to read.That is, IF he can find documentation or interview someone who was actually there. Otherwise, even he will believe the play.

Edited June 18, 2016 by Hecate7

[SeanC]

56 minutes ago, Hecate7 said:

I think the Lannisters will all be dead including him by the end, plus all the Starks save Arya, and Gendry Baratheon will most likely be seated on the Iron Throne.

If Gendry was going to be king at the end of this, I doubt he would have vanished for three seasons straight.  How would he even end up as king?

Quote

So yeah, I suspect that play will be how Tyrion and Sansa in particular are remembered by history. Even if Sansa lives on and has children and is Wardeness of the North, I suspect that people will continue to think of the Starks the way they are depicted in that play, unless Danaerys or Jon or Gendry decide to involve themselves a lot more closely in the propraganda world than I think they really would. Jon Snow isn't the type of king to cut out minstrel's tongues or censor playwrights. If the plays flattering him artistically eclipse the ones written to flatter Cersei, then sure, this one will fade and die, but this one is good and probably isn't going anywhere.

Actually, the point was made that that play is actually bad; Lady Crane was the only good thing about it, and she's dead.  But regardless, when there's a regime change, official histories change, and playwrights naturally cater to the new people in charge.  If the Starks are running the North at the end, and I don't doubt one or another will be, there'll be plenty of culture depicting their side of the story.  People will undoubtedly be remembered differently in various parts of the known world.  There's rather a lot of story for those people still to be told.

[RedheadZombie]

On ‎6‎/‎17‎/‎2016 at 5:07 PM, kittykat said:

LOL!  When I first saw the scene with the play my first thought was Avatar's Ember Island Players.  If only ActorNed had shouted "HONNOOOORRRR" before being beheaded.

I have three scenarios for Ramsay's impending death.

1.  He gets fed to his dogs/Ghost chow! (My personal preference)

2. Jon beheads him. (The most likely outcome because of the whole "man who passes the sentence...")

3.  Littlefinger kills him in a prison cell before trial chiding him a disappoint and a "bad investment" (we know how LF feels about his bad investments lest we forget Ros)

Regarding Ramsay's death:

1.  Yes, please!  I would like him to die in the same horrific manner he dispatches his enemies.  Unless he's given to one of his own men to flay, I don't think Jon would be wiling to give that order.  The thought of Ghost killing him is lovely,  but too quick.   Death by his own dogs sounds fair, but with a twist.  Like perhaps suspending him high, and the dogs starting with his feet.  I'm not into torture porn so I don't want to actually see it, but the thought of it is satisfying.

2.  I agree it's a likely outcome, but it seems too honorable of a death for me. 

3.  I do not like this option - at all.  I don't want LF doing anything at all that may mitigate his leaving Sansa with Ramsay.  And I don't think the little pissant is capable of killing a man.  Sure he killed Lysa, but she was a skinny woman who was in love with him, and unable to fight back.  He had to outsource Joffrey's death to Olenna.  He's a coward at heart and if he was somehow involved in Ramsay's death, I think it's on the periphery.  And after watching this sneaky little rat all these years, I deeply resent the scene in which he had his dagger at Ned's throat.  As if.  Robert could have dispatched him fat, drunk, and on his deathbed.  LF is beyond any redemption for me, and I don't want him doing anything that seems honorable.  I want him to die, but after Sansa finds out he brought about the downfall of the Starks, and for her to spit in his face first.  I can wait until the end though, he's interesting.  But no happy endings, please.

[Chris24601]

Regarding Ramsey's death... I agree dog/Ghost food would be good. Alternately, since Theon is not there to do the deed I could also see Sansa doing the deed ("She's not a killer... yet").

As to option two, instead of beheading, Ramsey could certainly get the normal punishment for treason... hanging. For that matter knocking the chair out from under him as he hangs would be something Sansa could do as well if she was the one to deliver the sentence.

Maybe she could even do a Ramsey/Littlefinger twofer?

[kittykat]

I don't like option three either.  I only included it as the cynical option and well...cynicism wins all too often.  And it would be In character for LF to categorize Ramsay as a bad investment.  I'd love it of Sansa were the one to kick the pedestal if he does hang.

I don't think LF is dead by seasons end.  He'll weasel his way back into their inner circle.  He will bring the Vale and Robin loves him and that will buy him a few episodes at least.

If anything I want him alive long enough for his treasons to be exposed by someone who knows about his betrayal of Ned.  I'm thinking Sandor.  Maybe Jaime, he wasn't in KL at the time of Ned's arrest but maybe Cersei told him.  And also to be exposed as the mastermind behind Joffrey and Jon Arryn.  Though Sansa knows that so hopefully she's waiting for the right moment to throw him under the bus in that regard.

[Audreythe2nd]

You guys realize that because you don't like option three, that's the one that's most likely to happen right? :-D

(I'm serious, I think it would be just up the show's alley to have the person we least want to kill Ramsay kill Ramsay, as opposed to Jon or Sansa).

[Hecate7]

16 hours ago, Maximum Taco said:

True, but if Jon or Dany wins the Iron Throne Joff will likely be remembered as a tyrannical monster who not only plunged the Kingdoms into a war which nearly destroyed them, but delighted in ordering his Kingsguard to savage and beat his betrothed (not even having the wherewithal to do it himself) before ultimately discarding her and forcing her into a loveless marriage with a grotesque imp.

I don't see Tyrion's reputation ever recovering because even if he is cleared of wrongdoing in Joff's death (highly unlikely), he did still kill his father. He's clearly just a crazed dog who wants to wipe out all the legitimate heirs to the Lannister name.

But Sansa could easily be forgiven (perhaps even celebrated) for ridding the world of such a monster, maybe even more so if she is painted as the mastermind of the scheme. Because then not only did she rid the world of Joff, she very nearly organized Tyrion's downfall too.

There are very few people left alive who know about Joffrey's actual behavior and personality. Jon Snow and Dany don't even know about Sansa's experiences in King's Landing. They weren't there. The record will only change if Tyrion or Sansa are in control of it, and I'm not sure they ever will be.

Because of his youth and the brevity of his reign, Joffrey will most likely be remembered as the reluctant dupe of the Demon Monkey, and not the monster he was. There are really very few surviving witnesses to his awfulness. I agree that Tyrion is stuck with his bad rep, even if he saves the world, because that's one of the major themes of this series--how easy it is for a lie to get halfway around the world before the truth can put its boots on.Tyrion was blamed for all of Joffrey's tyranny during his tenure as Hand, so merely being Hand again is unlikely to change anything about his reputation. If he heroically sacrifices himself for the common good, few people are likely to know, and even fewer will listen to them about it.

As for Sansa, I suspect she will gain a reputation as a siren seducing men to their doom. Those who know the truth of her story are mostly dead or discredited, like Theon, Tyrion, or Dontos.

[paigow]

22 minutes ago, Hecate7 said:

There are very few people left alive who know about Joffrey's actual behavior and personality. Jon Snow and Dany don't even know about Sansa's experiences in King's Landing. They weren't there. The record will only change if Tyrion or Sansa are in control of it, and I'm not sure they ever will be.

If Varys survives, he would be the new "Bard" and rewrite history accordingly...Tyrion - not Tywin - defeated Stannis at Blackwater etc.

[SeanC]

43 minutes ago, Hecate7 said:

There are very few people left alive who know about Joffrey's actual behavior and personality. Jon Snow and Dany don't even know about Sansa's experiences in King's Landing. They weren't there. The record will only change if Tyrion or Sansa are in control of it, and I'm not sure they ever will be.

Because of his youth and the brevity of his reign, Joffrey will most likely be remembered as the reluctant dupe of the Demon Monkey, and not the monster he was. There are really very few surviving witnesses to his awfulness.

Why would Jon or Dany have any interest in Joffrey being remembered as the "reluctant dupe of the Demon Monkey"?  Also, I would imagine Jon does know about Sansa's experiences in King's Landing, since they evidently had a lengthy off-screen exposition session.

[Hecate7]

13 hours ago, SeanC said:

If Gendry was going to be king at the end of this, I doubt he would have vanished for three seasons straight.  How would he even end up as king?

Actually, the point was made that that play is actually bad; Lady Crane was the only good thing about it, and she's dead.  But regardless, when there's a regime change, official histories change, and playwrights naturally cater to the new people in charge.  If the Starks are running the North at the end, and I don't doubt one or another will be, there'll be plenty of culture depicting their side of the story.  People will undoubtedly be remembered differently in various parts of the known world.  There's rather a lot of story for those people still to be told.

Gendry might not be found, in which case someone even less likely will end up on the pointy chair.

The play obviously wasn't bad, or Arya wouldn't have been so spellbound by Lady Crane to begin with. Your point about regime change, though, is well taken. As we saw season one when Joffrey had the minstrel's tongue cut out, you're right about royal favor being important. And I'm sure you're right that in the end a Stark will rule the North again. 

However, the main culture comes out of King's Landing, the big port city and cultural hub of the Seven Kingdoms. The North is more of a cultural desert. It's 16th Century Moscow to King's Landing's 16th Century Paris. Even the Starks, the highest born, richest family in the North, with the most leisure time, play no musical instruments and keep very few books. They spend their time sparring and practicing their bows, swords, and axes. The North's warrior values mean that a man who tries to excel at music instead of swordplay or archery is in for a rough time and a short, hard life. The occasional foreign minstrel hiding from the law or desperate for work might pass through the North, but the North itself is apt to breed very few minstrels, poets, or playwrights, and appears to have no playhouses or theatres whatsoever. Unlike Braavos and King's Landing, ruling the North doesn't involve being a major artistic patron. Whichever Stark is ruling the North at the end is apt to be unconcerned with the historical narrative.

There's a lot more story to be told, but I do think that "Bloody Hand" will be so influential that it's going to inform the whole narrative for centuries to come. When Westeros finally gets schoolbooks and libaries, "Hand" will be the major source those schoolbooks draw on for understanding what happened in King's Landing during this period.

[SeanC]

26 minutes ago, Hecate7 said:

The play obviously wasn't bad, or Arya wouldn't have been so spellbound by Lady Crane to begin with.

No, it was bad.  That's explicitly mentioned in dialogue, not to mention discernable from most of the scenes.  It's a low farce, not Shakespeare (the book play is imitation Shakespeare, by comparison).

Quote

Whichever Stark is ruling the North at the end is apt to be unconcerned with the historical narrative.

All rulers are concerned with the historical narrative, and besides which, the people who write the histories and plays tend to avoid offending the people in power (censorship or not, and if this is a realistic medieval setting, all regimes practised censorship).

Quote

There's a lot more story to be told, but I do think that "Bloody Hand" will be so influential that it's going to inform the whole narrative for centuries to come. When Westeros finally gets schoolbooks and libaries, "Hand" will be the major source those schoolbooks draw on for understanding what happened in King's Landing during this period.

It's a play being performed by a single traveling theatre troupe, of low quality, and not even in Westeros.  For all we know, Izembaro will ditch it for the epic of Daenerys the Dragon Queen in two years and it will never be performed again.

Edited June 19, 2016 by SeanC

[Hecate7]

47 minutes ago, paigow said:

If Varys survives, he would be the new "Bard" and rewrite history accordingly...Tyrion - not Tywin - defeated Stannis at Blackwater etc.

Intriguing, and possible...has Varys written anything else? It would take a court insider to be able to present a sympathetic Tyrion or Sansa.

Quote

Why would Jon or Dany have any interest in Joffrey being remembered as the "reluctant dupe of the Demon Monkey"?  Also, I would imagine Jon does know about Sansa's experiences in King's Landing, since they evidently had a lengthy off-screen exposition session.

Because of his extreme youth and the brevity of his reign, Danaerys will be less inclined to blame him for what Jaime Lannister did to her father. She won't know Tommen from Joffrey, and will probably confuse the two in her mind. Myrcella, too. They'll blur together into one pretty golden-haired innocent victim of circumstance, because that's what Tommen and Myrcella really were, and that's what King's Landing, Braavos, Pentos, The Vale, The Reach, The Riverlands, and possibly even Dorne and the North think of Joffrey as well. So unless she asks Tyrion's opinion, Danaerys will remember Joffrey that way as well. Tyrion himself may decide to soft-pedal the Joffrey hate in the interests of smoothing Danaerys' cultural assimilation into the Seven Kingdoms.

As for what interest Jon Snow would have, zero, but that's just it. He probably won't be bothered with it at all, and so the stories will go on the way the audience wants them. Snow's not the type to cut out a minstrel's tongue because the song tells his mother's secrets, or order the suppression of a book or a play because it doesn't sufficiently flatter his sister. He might deign to watch a play with a polite and bored expression, depending on who his consort is, but he'll ultimately prefer watching sports. He is a Northman, after all.

[Hecate7]

4 minutes ago, SeanC said:

No, it was bad.  That's explicitly mentioned in dialogue, not to mention discernable from most of the scenes.  It's a low farce, not Shakespeare (the book play is imitation Shakespeare, by comparison).

All rulers are concerned with the historical narrative, and besides which, the people who write the histories and plays tend to avoid offending the people in power (censorship or not, and if this is a realistic medieval setting, all regimes practised censorship).

It's a play being performed by a single traveling theatre troupe, of low quality, and not even in Westeros.  For all we know, Izembaro will ditch it for the epic of Daenerys the Dragon Queen in two years and it will never be performed again.

All medieval plays were low farce with some occasional heightened language sprinkled in. Many of Shakespeare's plays were low farce with high language, too.

With you on the Danaerys the Dragon Queen idea, although I worry that her reign will be even shorter than Joffrey's, given what her background music sounds like.

[paigow]

18 minutes ago, Hecate7 said:

 Danaerys the Dragon Queen 

Change the music....

You are the Dragon Queen, young and sweet, only seventeen

[SeanC]

1 hour ago, Hecate7 said:

Because of his extreme youth and the brevity of his reign, Danaerys will be less inclined to blame him for what Jaime Lannister did to her father. She won't know Tommen from Joffrey, and will probably confuse the two in her mind. Myrcella, too. They'll blur together into one pretty golden-haired innocent victim of circumstance, because that's what Tommen and Myrcella really were, and that's what King's Landing, Braavos, Pentos, The Vale, The Reach, The Riverlands, and possibly even Dorne and the North think of Joffrey as well. So unless she asks Tyrion's opinion, Danaerys will remember Joffrey that way as well. Tyrion himself may decide to soft-pedal the Joffrey hate in the interests of smoothing Danaerys' cultural assimilation into the Seven Kingdoms.

The Vale doesn't support the Lannisters, as we already know.  Joffrey is infamous in the North, etc. for ordering Ned's execution.  He's certainly not remembered fondly in the Riverlands or Dorne.

Why wouldn't Dany ask Tyrion's opinion about these things?  Why would Tyrion ever want Joffrey to be regarded sympathetically at the expense of his own reputation?  Moreover, as one of the kings that Dany immediately replaced, whom she considers usurpers, Joffrey would logically be painted in a negative light, which in Joffrey's case happens to be true; he's the king who instigated the bloody war that Daenerys' arrival brought to a conclusion.

Quote

As for what interest Jon Snow would have, zero, but that's just it. He probably won't be bothered with it at all, and so the stories will go on the way the audience wants them. Snow's not the type to cut out a minstrel's tongue because the song tells his mother's secrets, or order the suppression of a book or a play because it doesn't sufficiently flatter his sister. He might deign to watch a play with a polite and bored expression, depending on who his consort is, but he'll ultimately prefer watching sports. He is a Northman, after all.

All monarchs are concerned with their public image, and I'm absolutely sure Jon would care about his family being defamed.  Arya certainly does, from what we see.  The Starks have propagated their own legend as much as anybody else.

1 hour ago, Hecate7 said:

All medieval plays were low farce with some occasional heightened language sprinkled in.

No, they weren't.  "The Bloody Hand" isn't even in the same league as something that would have been performed by Shakespeare, Marlowe, Kyd, etc.  The dialogue is purposefully amateurship couplets.

Edited June 19, 2016 by SeanC

[Maximum Taco]

1 hour ago, paigow said:

Change the music....

You are the Dragon Queen, young and sweet, only seventeen

Mamma (of Dragons) Mia?

Edited June 19, 2016 by Maximum Taco

[Chris24601]

2 hours ago, Hecate7 said:

However, the main culture comes out of King's Landing, the big port city and cultural hub of the Seven Kingdoms. The North is more of a cultural desert.

You mean the King's Landing that, per show prophecy, is going to be a bombed out ruin before Dany even gets to it? The place that's going to be overrun by Dothraki, Ironborn and dragons (the Unsullied are about the only force in Dany's army that would do any good at policing instead of sewing fear and chaos)?

I suspect that by the time its all over, Winterfell is going to look like a bastion of civilization compared to the rest of Westeros.

I also agree with SeanC... the play was written (badly) by the guy playing the role of Tywin and Lady Crane was the only thing that gave it any weight. This was not some Shakespearean masterpiece and with Lady Crane now dead (and another actress recently disfigured) the writer/actor will  probably have to go and write something that can be performed with whatever new talent he can scrape up (the talent pool shrinks immensely when 'dead or disfigured' is a likely outcome). It'll go out of fashion quicker than the one done by the Ember Island Players predicting the victory of Fire Lord Ozai over the Avatar.

[Misplaced]

3 hours ago, Hecate7 said:

The play obviously wasn't bad, or Arya wouldn't have been so spellbound by Lady Crane to begin with. 

Lady Crane was good, the rest of the play was bad.  What was Arya's line -- "it would all just be farting, belching and slapping without you"?  

[Oscirus]

The play was meant to be an over the top comedy. Yea it was sympathetic to Cersei, because pissing off the crown would be stupid,  but I don't see it as being the general opinion of the people.

Tyrion and Sansa's images will likely depend on where they wind up. If Tyrion winds up in Kings landing, it will likely change, if he dies or goes to the Rocky, then, he'll be seen as some variation of the demon monkey. Sansa will likely either be seen as a victim of ruthless men or a survivor of them.

[Hecate7]

7 hours ago, SeanC said:

The Vale doesn't support the Lannisters, as we already know.  Joffrey is infamous in the North, etc. for ordering Ned's execution.  He's certainly not remembered fondly in the Riverlands or Dorne.

Why wouldn't Dany ask Tyrion's opinion about these things?  Why would Tyrion ever want Joffrey to be regarded sympathetically at the expense of his own reputation?  Moreover, as one of the kings that Dany immediately replaced, whom she considers usurpers, Joffrey would logically be painted in a negative light, which in Joffrey's case happens to be true; he's the king who instigated the bloody war that Daenerys' arrival brought to a conclusion.

All monarchs are concerned with their public image, and I'm absolutely sure Jon would care about his family being defamed.  Arya certainly does, from what we see.  The Starks have propagated their own legend as much as anybody else.

No, they weren't.  "The Bloody Hand" isn't even in the same league as something that would have been performed by Shakespeare, Marlowe, Kyd, etc.  The dialogue is purposefully amateurship couplets.

Shakespeare, Marlowe, Kyd, etc...are not medieval playwrights. They are Renaissance playwrights. In Medieval times, Italy was leading the world in culture, and theatre was a rather catch-as-catch-can affair, with Commedia d'ell Arte troups of stock characters the most common form of theatre.

All monarchs are concerned to some extent with their public image, but that doesn't mean they care about all aspects or forms of it. Robert Baratheon wasn't remotely concerned with it really, and there have been plenty of kings made in that mold.

Danaerys is a little bit busy. Jon Snow is even busier. We haven't even seen her express mild curiosity about Joffrey. Joffrey's dead and that page of history has been written, and in keeping with the central theme of this story, it's all lies. Also, Joffrey didn't instigate the war. Stannis Baratheon and Ned Stark did.

 

Jon and Sansa have barely talked about what Ramsey did to her, let alone her history with Joffrey. Jon will fight for his family, but he's the kind of nice person who will say "well, he was a child," and accept whatever story comes out of King's Landing about Joff. If Sansa tells him her story he'll believe her, but it doesn't look as if she even cares to do that. Right now they're busy planning a war. Managing the propraganda isn't even on their radar, and I'm skeptical that they'll live long enough for that to become a priority. Meanwhile, Sansa is nothing if not socially savvy now, and she's smart enough to know that telling your victim story isn't the way to win friends and influence people. Notice that she isn't leading with it with any of the Northern lords--she's simply talking about duty, honor, and the Stark name, not trying to outrage them on her behalf.

Edited June 19, 2016 by Hecate7

[SeanC]

4 minutes ago, Hecate7 said:

Shakespeare, Marlowe, Kyd, etc...are not medieval playwrights. They are Renaissance playwrights. In Medieval times, Italy was leading the world in culture, and theatre was a rather catch-as-catch-can affair, with Commedia d'ell Arte troups of stock characters the most common form of theatre.

Braavos is a Renaissance-era city.

Quote

Danaerys is a little bit busy. Jon Snow is even busier. We haven't even seen her express mild curiosity about Joffrey. Joffrey's dead and that page of history has been written, and in keeping with the central theme of this story, it's all lies.

No, it hasn't.  History is constantly rewritten.  Saying Joffrey's image is set is like saying Triumph of the Will was the final word on Adolf Hitler.  If/when Daenerys takes the throne, the Baratheon/"Baratheon" regime will be regarded very differently than it is now; and that version of events will perhaps be untrue in other ways, but Joffrey will not be regarded favourably.

Edited June 19, 2016 by SeanC

[Winnief]

Quote

No, it hasn't.  History is constantly rewritten.  Saying Joffrey's image is set is like saying Triumph of the Will was the final word on Adolf Hitler.  If/when Daenerys takes the throne, the Baratheon/"Baratheon" regime will be regarded very differently than it is now; and that version of events will perhaps be untrue in other ways, but Joffrey will not be regarded favourably.

Plus Tyrion might well get a better write-up in a Dany sponsored history.   And then there's the question of what a certain half-Stark, half-Targaryen might record for posterity if HE ever takes the throne.  Or did nobody else think Davos and Tormund's exchange about how Jon Snow was no king was blatant foreshadowing?!?

[kittykat]

Option #1 for the win!!! :-)

[Chris24601]

49 minutes ago, kittykat said:

Option #1 for the win!!! :-)

Indeed, and I even managed to call that it would be Sansa who fed him to the dogs. Only thing better would have been if Theon had been there to help.

[Oscirus]

Question.  Was Jamie ever on Arya's list? because Walder and the Waif are only two people. Since it's a safe bet that Stonehart's not returning, we need a third person and I doubt that Arya's making it to Queen's landing in one episode.

[SeanC]

34 minutes ago, Oscirus said:

Question.  Was Jamie ever on Arya's list? 

Nope.  A somewhat conspicuous absence, actually, since he killed Jory and Ned's other men, and wounded Ned.

Regarding the "three names" bit, keep in mind that Sophie doesn't actually read the parts of the script she's not in, so her spoilers about Arya's story are presumably relayed from whatever she hears from her BFF Maisie.  It's possible that the number of names crossed off got garbled.

[Hecate7]

2 hours ago, Winnief said:

Plus Tyrion might well get a better write-up in a Dany sponsored history.   And then there's the question of what a certain half-Stark, half-Targaryen might record for posterity if HE ever takes the throne.  Or did nobody else think Davos and Tormund's exchange about how Jon Snow was no king was blatant foreshadowing?!?

I hope it is! I really do. I don't think any write-up he gets will help Tyrion--he was once the Hand blamed for all of Joffrey's bad decisions and cruelty, and under Dany he will be the Hand blamed for anything evil she happens to do. That's what being unpopular is.

Kings don't do the recording. They approve or not, but they're not writing the history. Sam is the one most likely to do it, and he'll write the version he actually hears and believes is true. And I never said Joffrey would be remembered "favorably," merely that Tyrion will continue to be blamed, as always, for all the Bad Stuff Joff Did. That's how it's worked til now and I don't think there's any PR campaign that can fix it. I also just don't think people are going to be that passionate about setting the record straight about Joff. Not even Sansa is going to care that much--she's got bigger fish to fry. Not to mention that in fact she doesn't KNOW whose idea it was to execute Ned instead of send him to the wall. Joffrey's? Littlefinger's? Tyrion's? Let's not forget that Sansa herself is taking advice from the very man who engineered Ned's downfall.

The biggest theme in this whole story is that people rarely know the truth. Sansa has no idea what her mentor has been up to. In the books she might get an inkling if she ever learns what he did to Jeyne Poole. Catelyn Stark joined her murderous sister in blaming the Lannisters for Jon Arryn's murder. Tyrion was clueless about Shae, and loved Jaime "for a kindness he never performed." Nobody knows who really sent the assassin to Bran's room. Now, if Sansa becomes Minister of Arts and Revels or something, maybe she'll get the true story out there, or have "Bloody Hand" rewritten or something. But I suspect it's in our story AT ALL to invite the obvious comparison between it, and Richard III. Tyrion is the Richard III figure responsible in the public's mind (and Cersei's), for the deaths of Joffrey, Tywin, Myrcella, and eventually Tommen. Since he really did kill Tywin, and really did get into Danaerys' good graces by claiming to be the foremost slaughterer of Lannisters in the world, that reputation probably won't be corrected by Danaerys or anybody else. Whether Joffrey assumes Caligula-like dimensions in future stories depends very much on how important that story is to Danaerys. She may be content to let him be remembered as a boy unready to rule, rather than a monster who terrorized everyone. It all depends on what her priorities are. By the time they get to King's Landing if at all, Tyrion may have fallen from Danaerys' grace anyway.

[Winnief]

Quote

Let's not forget that Sansa herself is taking advice from the very man who engineered Ned's downfall.

The biggest theme in this whole story is that people rarely know the truth. Sansa has no idea what her mentor has been up to. In the books she might get an inkling if she ever learns what he did to Jeyne Poole

Yeah, I'm wondering if all that might be about to change.  Even if she knows the truth or not, somehow I don't see Sansa supporting LF over Jon.

[ElizaD]

Based on the 6x10 preview, I'd guess that the Sansa/Littlefinger scene in the godswood comes first, after Sansa leaves Littlefinger notices that Jon is there and they have a chat, then Jon has the forehead kiss scene with her since he's seen what a devious manipulator she's been dealing with, which leads to Sansa trusting him and publicly proclaiming her support for his kingship. If Littlefinger lives he'll try to get her to mess with Jon's plans in season 7, but season 6, at least, will end with Sansa showing signs of brain activity and choosing Jon over Littlefinger.

I thought Melisandre would live long enough to see Arya again, but since Davos figured out the truth about Shireen she might join the mass departure of major cast members in 6x10.

[AshleyN]

So yeah, not that we all weren't predicting it anyways, but this episode pretty much confirmed that King's Landing is going to burn next week, didn't it?

And as frustrated as I was with the whole Sansa/Littlefinger/Jon fuckery this week, I am happy that the preview seems to indicate that it'll be addressed next week. I'm not sure I see it going as far as Sansa proclaiming Jon king, or him accepting it though. I think that would be too large a leap for both of their characters to take overnight (not to mention that unlike it the books, they both know that there's still a chance that Bran is alive, which would technically make him the heir). I'd be satisfied with a mutual understanding that they both made mistakes and need to learn to trust each other.

Edited June 20, 2016 by AshleyN

[SeanC]

36 minutes ago, ElizaD said:

I thought Melisandre would live long enough to see Arya again, but since Davos figured out the truth about Shireen she might join the mass departure of major cast members in 6x10.

Maybe Jon exiles her, which would free her up to encounter Arya again?

[kittykat]

Yeah I don't see Mel dying.  Jon has never been gung ho about the whole "Prince that was Promised."  Davos has become a better friend and in the end he'll probably take his side.  I see exile more than anything.  As SeanC said that leaves her to see Arya again and maybe the Brotherhood.

1 hour ago, AshleyN said:

And as frustrated as I was with the whole Sansa/Littlefinger/Jon fuckery this week, I am happy that the preview seems to indicate that it'll be addressed next week. I'm not sure I see it going as far as Sansa proclaiming Jon king, or him accepting it though. I think that would be too large a leap for both of their characters to take overnight (not to mention that unlike it the books, they both know that there's still a chance that Bran is alive, which would technically make him the heir). I'd be satisfied with a mutual understanding that they both made mistakes and need to learn to trust each other.

I think from this point forward Sansa and Jon will be more in sync with one another.  They have a united goal to rebuild Winterfell and the North and to stop the threat of the WW.  As far as Bran goes, they both know he is alive they just don't know where.  I've been wondering if Bran will make it back to WF by season's end.  Given that we haven't seen him since 6.6 and the rules of travel on this show it's possible.

I don't see Sansa ever agreeing to a marriage with Littlefinger.  If she has to marry again Robin Arryn would be the likely choice since he the actual Lord Protector and Warden of the East (they've made him stronger and not poisoned by sweetsleep in the show so his health doesn't seem to be a concern).  

[ElizaD]

1 hour ago, SeanC said:

Maybe Jon exiles her, which would free her up to encounter Arya again?

That reminds me, if Arya crosses off three names next week (Walder and the two sons), the Frey/Lannister feast could turn out to be yet another occasion when Jaime watches helplessly as someone is poisoned right in front of him. Since Arya no longer has her own supporting cast and is ending the season in the Riverlands, she should start interacting with established characters soon; even though emotionally it makes sense that she would go home to Winterfell, her skills would be more useful in the south.