Television Vs. Book: Why'd They Make [Spoiler] Such A [Spoiler]?

[Eyes High]

37 minutes ago, Advance35 said:

And it's really weird what people who don't follow the show perceive things.  I had a friend over during the last episode and she thought Jon and Sansa were love interest.   It was the cloak scene.   She thought it was "cute", though she said Jon likes Sansa more then vice versa.  I reserve the right to change my mind but at this point, if the story concludes that way, I wouldn't be surprised.

I think it's too early to write off any possible ship as dead and buried or as fucking confirmed (as the Cleganebowl fans like to say) in the show, be it Jon/Arya, Sandor/Sansa, Jaime/Brienne, etc. etc. The show--except when it comes to giving Peter Dinklage material--is incredibly focused, especially now that they have so few episodes left planned. There is virtually no dialogue that isn't moving the plot along; apart from Tyrion scenes, the days on GOT of having characters sitting around shooting the shit with no purpose other than character development are long gone. (Even Brienne's speech in Season 5 which looked like character development had the aim of reminding us that Brienne intended to kill Stannis for what he did to Renly.) It's pretty common for the GOT writers to put plotlines and character relationships in storage until they're ready to dust them off again. That's what's led a number of fans to believe things will be cut from the show when in fact they've merely been delayed (Euron and the kingsmoot, e.g.). I could easily buy Sansa, after several seasons' worth of not mentioning the Hound at all, suddenly "remembering" that she's madly in love with him and falling into his arms in Season 8, or Jon, after several seasons' worth of not mentioning Arya at all, greeting her upon their reunion with a passionate avowal that he's missed her every single day. 

As for Jon and Sansa's closeness and warm, emotional reunion in 6x04, it's too soon to tell if it's setting up a closer bond between them or whether it's luring the viewers into a false sense of security so as to twist the knife better later on, much as they did with Stannis and Shireen. We'll see.

Vis-a-vis the outline, where it's been speculated that outline Arya's plotline has been moved to Sansa in the books, pointing to Tyrion falling in love with Arya in the outline and marrying Sansa in the books, aside from the fact that Tyrion never fell in love with Sansa in the books, Tyrion and Sansa did have a relationship in the outline. The outline states that Tyrion befriends both Sansa and Arya, and although Sansa's pretty much a footnote in the outline (and it seems hinted that she dies at Jaime's hands fairly early on), outline Sansa and outline Tyrion do have a friendship.

Going back to the show vs. books, we know that the big Santa Fe meeting with GRRM and the writers was in the spring of 2013, i.e. when Season 4 was in the process of being written. I've tried to go back and see if there was some sort of significant shift in the attention given to plotlines or in characterization from Season 3 to Season 4 and beyond that might suggest a change reflecting new information they'd received. The only thing I can think of is that Gendry completely disappeared from the show after Season 3, but then Season 3 gave a graceful out for the character in any event. As for Sansa, we know from the writers that they planned the Sansa/Jeyne swap back in 2012, before the Santa Fe meeting.

Edited May 25, 2016 by Eyes High

[SeanC]

12 minutes ago, Maximum Taco said:

And if that Sansa chapter was supposed to be in Dance, I'm assuming a bunch more were also supposed to be. 

No, there was only ever one.  It was a drop-in chapter, akin to the Cersei, Jaime and Arya chapters in the same book.

In Sansa's case it's not a question of GRRM needing to remove things.  Sansa had only 3 chapters in AFFC; Tyrion in ADWD had a dozen.  He could simply have written more Sansa chapters.  But he moved her last chapter to TWOW because he considered it more the start of a new storyline than the ending of the previous one (which, having read it, I completely agree with).

[SeanC]

15 minutes ago, Eyes High said:

I could easily buy Sansa, after several seasons' worth of not mentioning the Hound at all, suddenly "remembering" that she's madly in love with him and falling into his arms in Season 8

I could certainly imagine it too, though if it does I'll be interested to see audience reaction, because there is like no buildup for that at all, and most show-only fans that I've seen primarily associate the Hound with Arya now.  Heck, even Sophie, in her interviews, pretty clearly doesn't think of the Hound as being all that significant in Sansa's story, which is an understandable conclusion based on what she's been given to play.

[benteen]

I'm still trying to figure out how Stannis will even be in a position to order Shireen to be burned.  Unless he sends a letter to Mel, it would suggest he survives the battle of Winterfell.  And what are they going to do, burn Shireen in front of the NIght's Watch?

Although the darkness can be a lot at times, the show becoming dark and grimmer doesn't bother me.  The book is dark and grim.  I've been enjoying the show this season more than I have in quite a while.

Though I have had it with Super Ramsay and his terrible deeds.

Edited May 25, 2016 by benteen

[Eyes High]

37 minutes ago, SeanC said:

I could certainly imagine it too, though if it does I'll be interested to see audience reaction, because there is like no buildup for that at all, and most show-only fans that I've seen primarily associate the Hound with Arya now.  Heck, even Sophie, in her interviews, pretty clearly doesn't think of the Hound as being all that significant in Sansa's story, which is an understandable conclusion based on what she's been given to play.

There's a lot of SanSan...subtext, for lack of a better word (I'd hesitate to call it "setup" without knowing where GRRM is going with it) in the books. I think if Sansa ends up with the Hound in the books, she will in the show, even if it happens in jarring and sudden fashion. Ditto for Jon and Arya, or Jon and Sansa. It's too soon to say either way, though. 

Quote

Heck, even Sophie, in her interviews, pretty clearly doesn't think of the Hound as being all that significant in Sansa's story, which is an understandable conclusion based on what she's been given to play.

Sophie's favourite Sansa relationship appears to be Littlefinger/Sansa, and she has also spoken of Tyrion and Sansa's relationship in pretty glowing terms. She ships Sansa with Margaery, though. Heh.

Though I have had it with Super Ramsay and his terrible deeds.

An article on Vulture.com recently pointed out that Ramsay is way worse in the books.

Edited May 25, 2016 by Eyes High

[SeanC]

6 minutes ago, Eyes High said:

There's a lot of SanSan...subtext, for lack of a better word (I'd hesitate to call it "setup" without knowing where GRRM is going with it) in the books. I think if Sansa ends up with the Hound in the books, she will in the show, even if it happens in jarring and sudden fashion.

Oh I agree, the books are full of things that are pretty easy to read as relationship setup -- or, at a minimum, indicating some sort of payoff.  It's just all the more conspicuous how absent they are from the show.

[FemmyV]

42 minutes ago, SeanC said:

I could certainly imagine it too, though if it does I'll be interested to see audience reaction, because there is like no buildup for that at all, and most show-only fans that I've seen primarily associate the Hound with Arya now.  Heck, even Sophie, in her interviews, pretty clearly doesn't think of the Hound as being all that significant in Sansa's story, which is an understandable conclusion based on what she's been given to play.

 I have suspected Sansa had a sexual attraction to the Hound, but an unwelcome one. Not sure I could buy in if it happened *that* suddenly.

[sumiregusa]

Re: Jon/Sansa...

I have never once considered the possibility of them being a couple, before or in the future, and seeing their very touching reunion on the show in 6x04 (which I loved and had many feels over) did nothing to change my mind about that. I think a lot of it has to do with my view of their chemistry, which reads up down backwards sideways and front as "we are family now" not "hey maybe we should bone"... But again, chemistry is subjective. Maybe people are seeing things there that I don't. Doesn't change the fact that I don't and never will see it. Everyone can be so immediately "NOW KISS!" about certain characters on this show and in this franchise, but Jon/Sansa has never been on my radar and just seems super icky weird to me. Personal preference.

Aside from shallow stuff, putting them together is just not good writing IMHO. There has been nothing to suggest this great bond between them before now, on the show or in the books. I got nothing from their recent interactions other than two people ripped apart and abused by war and circumstance glad to finally see somebody they sort of know and remember from their past lives. Smashing them together into a marriage of anything other than convenience in 1 1/2 seasons is something that not even break-neck speed rush-into-everything D&D could pull off. 

[Umbelina]

3 hours ago, Chris24601 said:

Yes, because that's been the reaction from people I know who don't read the books or follow spoilers have had to the Jon/Sansa interactions. Someone completely new (hasn't even watched the rest of the series) who just happened to be over and watched that episode immediately asked if Jon and Sansa were lovers after the reunion scene.

You say 'raised from birth,' but the causal viewer hasn't seen that. The casual viewer saw Jon and Sansa meet for the very first time in just the last episode ("show" is way more powerful than "tell" in this medium). That same episode also made a point of them NOT being all that close as children ("I was awful to you."/"I spent most my time brooding in the corner instead of playing with you."). Finally, the simple fact of the matter is that Jon and Sansa do NOT look like siblings, especially when we're shown Cersei/Jamie, Yara/Theon and Margery/Loras in the same episode to compare them with.

Basically, the showrunners (who, unlike all the fans, actually KNOW the ending) have done everything possible to minimize what some in the audience might find squicky. And I do say SOME, because outside of certain parts of the United States (and only in the last hundred years at that) marrying your first cousin isn't actually incest. Queen Victoria, Charles Darwin, Edgar Allen Poe, H.G. Wells and Albert Einstein were all married to their first cousins.

It's also a poor argument when some of the same people who don't like Jon/Sansa are also huge supporters of Jon/Arya (who do look like siblings and have had sibling-like interactions) or of Jon/Dany (who is his biological aunt... which IS incest). Of the three most common pairings, Jon/Sansa is actually the least incestuous (are cousins, don't look alike and had some distance as children).

And its not really speculation from the original outline. Its more speculation based on certain bits of the published text coupled with theories on how the original outline got morphed in the process of writing. To start with the original outline DID have Jon's endgame as a relationship with a cousin he thought was his sister and even had a love triangle with Tyrion as a complication. But in the outline that cousin was Arya; who fled North from King's Landing after Ned's murder and started interacting with Jon in the North as they fought to reclaim their family home.

But the problem was that the outline relied upon a five-year time jump to take Arya from a kid to a teenager and GRRM discovered (and complained) that unlike his original plans, the various pieces in motion weren't going to wait while the dragons and children grew up. That's about the point Arya went from trying to get North to Jon to headed over to Braavos on the most boring side-quest ever and we started getting some textual elements that could be interpreted as groundwork for Jon/Sansa.

It's also worth noting that the outline also included things that panned out completely differently than the books; Dany was supposed to invade almost immediately after Drogo's death, Cat was still alive and with Arya North of the Wall with Jon, Sansa marries Joffrey and has his baby but Joffrey and the baby were murdered by Jaime who took the Iron Throne for himself. As such, I really don't think its useful for anything more than understanding GRRM's starting point in the writing process. Some elements, particularly names, were retained, but other things were either dropped or re-adapted (ex. outline Jaime got split into book Jaime and Cersei and a lot of outline Sansa's elements could probably be mapped onto book Margery pretty easily). Of particular interest in that regard to adaptation from the outline are that, if the show is any indication, Sansa will be headed North to interact with Jon and while on the show we've got Sansa's marriage to Ramsey as a complication... in the books it is Sansa's marriage to Tyrion that is a holdup on her ability to re-marry (throw in Jon in the North and it sorta looks like Jon, Tyrion and a Stark daughter in a love triangle like the outline had).

* * *

The main reason though is simply the logistics of storytelling. Even the leads average barely ten minutes of screen time per episode and it takes time to deliver a romance that is satisfying to general audiences. By the time this season is done we're looking at barely over a dozen episodes left in the entire series... that's barely two hours of screen time for Jon to form a satisfying romantic relationship while also leading the people against the Walkers and probably Dany's forces as well IF the romantic interest shows up in episode 7.01. But if you start laying the groundwork for it starting in say episodes 6.04 through 6.10 you've just added as much as an hour of additional screen time to squeeze the romance into the story.

In other words... Jon/Sansa makes more sense than Jon/Arya or Jon/Dany because there's actually time to tell that story while the other two would be rushed affairs at best or would take over the entire story at a point when we're gearing up for the final epic battle at worst.

Dany won't even make it to Westeros until the start of season seven and that will be down in the King's Landing area and it will be several episodes of cleaning up the mess before Dany can make her way North so late season seven and maybe half-a-dozen episodes left in the series. Best case scenario for Arya is that she makes it back to the Riverlands this season and murders some Freys. IF she immediately turns North then she might make it to Winterfell early in season seven with about ten already jam-packed episodes left. If she has other business to attend to first (like hunting down and murdering Cersei) then she could be as delayed as Dany in getting up to where Jon and Sansa are now.

That's the kicker... where Jon AND Sansa are now. They haven't split up on separate missions after their reunion. They're going on the mission together in their new Stark-focused duds that make them look like a young Ned and Cat. They're getting a few complications that will take trusting each other more to overcome just as you'd expect in a traditional romance arc so that, once Bran shows up with his knowledge of Jon's parentage its not going to take much in the final dozen episodes to resolve a romance satisfactorily for general audiences.

D&D know how this all ends and what it takes to sell certain endings to the audience so they go away satisfied. They put Sansa up north with Jon well ahead of her book counterpart for a reason.

If Jon was going to be ending up with Arya or Dany, they wouldn't still be languishing in stalled plotlines on another continent. They could have blown through Arya's story so far and more this season in two-episodes just by cutting out the repetitive filler with the Waif's stick fighting, lingering on more of the play's contents than was needed and the warty genitalia. Test her loyalty so she can get her eyesight back (episode one), then give her the assignment that will cause her to reclaim her identity/Needle and hop on a boat to Westeros (episode two). Ayra could probably have made it to Jon at Castle Black by episode four or five of this year if they'd really wanted to push a Jon/Arya relationship.

They didn't. As of episode five she's still not on her way out the door of the House of Black and White and back to Westeros. If she leaves Braavos before episode seven I'll be shocked. I'll wager right now that they're more likely to give her a reunion with the Hound this season than with any of her actual family.

Why? Because Jon/Arya as a romantic couple is not important to the story's endgame or D&D would be doing something to give it more space in the self-imposed time-frame they have left to tell their story.

Well, you've totally convinced me, because this is the most logical argument I've seen yet.  With the reveal of Jon's true parentage coming soon, I think that will eliminate the whole brother sister ick.  I don't think first cousins marrying is really that disgusting, even in today's world, but in the past it was often more common than not, as just about anyone who has done their own genealogy or studied aristocracy knows.  Even today, it not uncommon in the world. 

I do however remember another fantasy series I've read (thank you to whomever described "low" and "high" fantasy, it turns out I've read quite a bit of it after all!)  In the Mists of Avalon books, foster-siblings were considered far more "wrong" than biological cousins.  Meanwhile, as for this "low" fantasy stuff?  Yeah, I won't say "never again" but I will say it's extremely unlikely I'll read any more, though I will probably finish this series if given the chance by GRRM ever publishing.  If there is much more flaying and torture though?  Screw it.  I already feel like I'm covered in excrement I'll never get off, why willingly wade in for more?  If the show Ramsay/Sansa crap was the most interesting way to compel Sansa to Jon's arms?  I guess it fits with the whole feel of the books, but yuck.

Also, now the Littlefinger interaction with Sansa makes more sense to me.  There is the whole "Boy Gets Girl, Boy Loses Girl, Boy and Girl reunite" thing.  So her probably temporary but equally possibly disastrous lie to Jon will be their "boy loses girl" stand in, then Sansa will turn completely on Littlefinger, winning back Jon's love and trust. 

1 hour ago, SeanC said:

I could certainly imagine it too, though if it does I'll be interested to see audience reaction, because there is like no buildup for that at all, and most show-only fans that I've seen primarily associate the Hound with Arya now.  Heck, even Sophie, in her interviews, pretty clearly doesn't think of the Hound as being all that significant in Sansa's story, which is an understandable conclusion based on what she's been given to play.

The Hound is one of my favorite characters, because he was ground up by both his brother and the system into acting in ways that seemed far from his true self.  I also liked the monks quite a bit, (the only religious group in the story I have liked) and have always been sure he ended up saved by them, in more ways than one.  I hope he finds some kind of happiness and isn't just used to kill his brother, or die in valiant fighting for "good."  I really never saw him as ending up with one of the Stark girls, though he ended up protecting them both.  Arya has the most in common with him now, given the whole "killing on orders" thing, so I could see them bonding with that.  A romantic bond though?  I doubt it, I think he will be sacrificed in a heroic way.  If not, perhaps we will get "the start of a beautiful friendship" relationship.

Edited May 25, 2016 by Umbelina

[SeanC]

2 minutes ago, Umbelina said:

I really never saw him as ending up with one of the Stark girls, though he ended up protecting them both.  Arya has the most in common with him now, given the whole "killing on orders" thing, so I could see them bonding with that.  A romantic bond though?  I doubt it, I think he will be sacrificed in a heroic way.  If not, perhaps we will get "the start of a beautiful friendship" relationship.

The Hound's relationship with Arya absolutely isn't romantic, but it is a relationship, and one the show put a fair amount of time into.  The Hound had more dialogue with Arya in any one episode of Season 4 than he had with Sansa in the whole series.

[Maximum Taco]

49 minutes ago, Umbelina said:

I do however remember another fantasy series I've read (thank you to whomever described "low" and "high" fantasy, it turns out I've read quite a bit of it after all!)  In the Mists of Avalon books, foster-siblings were considered far more "wrong" than biological cousins.  Meanwhile, as for this "low" fantasy stuff?  Yeah, I won't say "never again" but I will say it's extremely unlikely I'll read any more, though I will probably finish this series if given the chance by GRRM ever publishing.  If there is much more flaying and torture though?  Screw it.  I already feel like I'm covered in excrement I'll never get off, why willingly wade in for more?  If the show Ramsay/Sansa crap was the most interesting way to compel Sansa to Jon's arms?  I guess it fits with the whole feel of the books, but yuck.

I wouldn't write off all low fantasy, GRRM is crueler then most authors (although if you have Martin fatigue I'd probably avoid Joe Abercrombie as well, he's pretty cruel as well), a guy like Scott Lynch has a nice mix though. Bad things happen, but not nearly as terrible as the stuff that happens in GOT/ASOIAF. Guy Gavriel Kay has found a happy medium between the two as well, he writes what I like to call bittersweet fantasy, not so much cruel and sadistic torture scenes, but melancholic heartache.

[Umbelina]

I need a bit of sugar with my medicine.

Not really, but the sentiment's the same.  I've read, and enjoyed very dark, very graphic things, but not this unrelenting bleakness and gratuitous graphic violence.  I loved the The Stieg Larsson Trilogy for example, and there is plenty of violence and heartbreak in some of Ursula LaGuin's books as well, hell it got pretty grim in the Avalon Mists series as well, I think in the books GRRM tries to alleviate this somewhat with his travelogues, but that's just not enough for me.  It's hard to imagine an ending that will make all of this worth it, hopefully there is one.  At least on the show.

I'm not saying gritty and horrifying reality doesn't have it's place, even in real crime books from In Cold Blood to Manson to horrifying accounts of war.  Maybe partly it's the length of the books, wallowing in misery for so very, very, very many pages, with almost no relief.  As many have said, Dany's supposed to be a "good guy" when she's bringing the raping and robbing and killing Dothraki to Westeros, along with the whole "It's mine by birth!" thing? 

@paramitch's post in the episode thread is what got me thinking about all of this again though.  I'm really enjoying this discussion though, many excellent points have been made, or POV's shared that have made me look at things in a different way.

Edited May 25, 2016 by Umbelina

[Eyes High]

1 hour ago, Maximum Taco said:

Guy Gavriel Kay has found a happy medium between the two as well, he writes what I like to call bittersweet fantasy, not so much cruel and sadistic torture scenes, but melancholic heartache.

Guy Gavriel Kay's material, at least his earlier works (I haven't read anything recent from him), had a lot of nasty stuff and plenty of cruel and sadistic torture as I recall. One of his earliest books featured the graphic rape of a lead character, something GRRM has said he will never do in ASOIAF. There's melancholic heartache, too, but Guy Gavriel Kay is as guilty as GRRM of using lurid material to spice up his stories.

Edited May 25, 2016 by Eyes High

[Maximum Taco]

58 minutes ago, Eyes High said:

Guy Gavriel Kay's material, at least his earlier works (I haven't read anything recent from him), had a lot of nasty stuff and plenty of cruel and sadistic torture as I recall. One of his earliest books featured the graphic rape of a lead character, something GRRM has said he will never do in ASOIAF. There's melancholic heartache, too, but Guy Gavriel Kay is as guilty as GRRM of using lurid material to spice up his stories.

His early works definitely (The Fionavar Tapestry and Tigana), even so I wouldn't say either of them has the degree of cruelty Martin employs in ASOIAF.

He seems to have mellowed quite a bit though. I also think his early works are some of his worst. He didn't really get into writing well until he wrote Lions.

All low fantasy is going to have some sort of cruelty, but I thought we were more highlighting the fact that ASOIAF feels like it's almost unrelenting in it's bleakness. I never felt that way with Kay's work, and I've read almost all of them.

Edited May 25, 2016 by Maximum Taco

[feverfew]

6 hours ago, Umbelina said:

I need a bit of sugar with my medicine.

Not really, but the sentiment's the same.  I've read, and enjoyed very dark, very graphic things, but not this unrelenting bleakness and gratuitous graphic violence.  I loved the The Stieg Larsson Trilogy for example, and there is plenty of violence and heartbreak in some of Ursula LaGuin's books as well, hell it got pretty grim in the Avalon Mists series as well, I think in the books GRRM tries to alleviate this somewhat with his travelogues, but that's just not enough for me.  It's hard to imagine an ending that will make all of this worth it, hopefully there is one.  At least on the show.

I'm not saying gritty and horrifying reality doesn't have it's place, even in real crime books from In Cold Blood to Manson to horrifying accounts of war.  Maybe partly it's the length of the books, wallowing in misery for so very, very, very many pages, with almost no relief.  As many have said, Dany's supposed to be a "good guy" when she's bringing the raping and robbing and killing Dothraki to Westeros, along with the whole "It's mine by birth!" thing? 

@paramitch's post in the episode thread is what got me thinking about all of this again though.  I'm really enjoying this discussion though, many excellent points have been made, or POV's shared that have made me look at things in a different way.

Umbelina, if you're looking for fantasy with great characters and a bit more sweet than bitter I'll recommend Robin Hobb's Liveship Traders-trilogy*. It has a rather interesting villain, some great female characters and despite it being high fantasy puts more weight on peoples' actions than its magic system. Or read Brandon Sanderson's Stormlight Archive (that man knows how to build a magic system with in-universe logic!)

*I know people usually suggest you read the Fitz books first (Farseer-trilogy) but Fitz reads like whiny Jon on steroids, IMO, and since there's only one floater character between those two series, I usually suggest LT first - especially if you like your female characters as more than just cardboard cut-outs ;)

4 hours ago, Maximum Taco said:

All low fantasy is going to have some sort of cruelty, but I thought we were more highlighting the fact that ASOIAF feels like it's almost unrelenting in it's bleakness. I never felt that way with Kay's work, and I've read almost all of them.

Tigana is - and always will be, I think, even though I like his newer stuff a lot - my absolute favourite. It's bleak and unrelenting in places, but never hopeless.

[OhOkayWhat]

10 hours ago, SeanC said:

Oh I agree, the books are full of things that are pretty easy to read as relationship setup -- or, at a minimum, indicating some sort of payoff.  It's just all the more conspicuous how absent they are from the show.

I agree.

9 hours ago, SeanC said:

The Hound's relationship with Arya absolutely isn't romantic, but it is a relationship, and one the show put a fair amount of time into.

About Sansa, Sandor and Arya relationships, within the show, there is almost twice screentime between Arya-Sandor than with Sansa-Sandor. Not only that, if we talk about the story of his face (an important scene, because it is about someone opening his heart and talking about this traumatic event) there are two moments where Arya talks about it with Sandor (if i remember correctly, she is mean and angry towards him in the first one and she is sad and sincerely cares about him in the second) and there is not even one with Sansa (Petyr tells her about it, Arya is present too). And it is interesting that there is not a scene in Sansa story post-season 2 with Sansa talking about the Hound. With Arya, we have one very interesting and complex scene in season 5 and another in season 6.

Sometimes people who read the books and expect some Sandor-Sansa romantic relationship as endgame in the books, extrapolate their interpretation of some elements of the books to their analysis of the show, and they end thinking they see hints in the show within scenes where the average viewer probably will not see them (because, I suspect, almost all of them are not hints).

Does it mean there will not be Sansa-Sandor romance in the show? of course, we do not know, maybe there will be Sansan in the two last seasons, but if it is the case, well, they are late in the game.

Even the only two times Sandor mention Sansa in the show, in my opinion, it is more about Arya and her relationship with Sandor. Their last scene together is one of them, and when director talks about it you can understand more or less, that he see the whole thing as a scene about Sandor love toward Arya (3 interviews and the Blue-ray commentaries, if I am not wrong). And, of course, it is not romantic love, it is friendship.

9 hours ago, Umbelina said:

If not, perhaps we will get "the start of a beautiful friendship" relationship.

My theory is that if both survive, they will have what I call "The Bruce Banner" ending: they will begin a journey together to find how to confront and erase the darkness within their hearts and at the same time help people in the post apocalyptic world.

Edited May 26, 2016 by OhOkayWhat

[SeanC]

1 hour ago, OhOkayWhat said:

About Sansa, Sandor and Arya relationships, within the show, there is almost twice screentime between Arya-Sandor than with Sansa-Sandor. 

Twice feels like a considerable understatement to me.  Arya and the Hound were each other's major scene partners for nine episodes (308-310, 401, 403, 405, 407-408, 410).  Sansa and the Hound's meaningful interactions are a fraction of that; they have only two exchanges of dialogue that go beyond one or two lines, in 207 and 209.

Quote

Sometimes people who read the books and expect some Sandor-Sansa romantic relationship as endgame in the books, extrapolate their interpretation of some elements of the books to their analysis of the show, and they end thinking they see hints in the show within scenes where the average viewer probably will not see them (because, I suspect, almost all of them are not hints).

My personal favourite attempt at excavating a parallelism is arguing that the fact that both of them are shown eating soup at different points in the series is a hint at their commonality.

Quote

Does it mean there will not be Sansa-Sandor romance in the show? of course, we do not know, maybe there will be Sansan in the two last seasons, but if it is the case, well, they are late in the game.

I get the sense that the writers had a hard time seeing how to do their early interactions in a way that wouldn't make the Hound look creepy, given the situation (it's an issue for many book readers, for that matter).  But if SanSan is going to be a thing -- and looking at the books it's not an unreasonable bet -- I find the consistent avoidance of having Sansa mention him in the going on four seasons since they parted way to be a very strange narrative choice.

Edited May 26, 2016 by SeanC

[Eyes High]

45 minutes ago, SeanC said:

Twice feels like a considerable understatement to me.  Arya and the Hound were each other's major scene partners for nine episodes (308-310, 401, 403, 405, 407-408, 410).  Sansa and the Hound's meaningful interactions are a fraction of that; they have only two exchanges of dialogue that go beyond one or two lines, in 207 and 209.

My personal favourite attempt at excavating a parallelism is arguing that the fact that both of them are shown eating soup at different points in the series is a hint at their commonality.

I get the sense that the writers had a hard time seeing how to do their early interactions in a way that wouldn't make the Hound look creepy, given the situation (it's an issue for many book readers, for that matter).  But if SanSan is going to be a thing -- and looking at the books it's not an unreasonable bet -- I find the consistent avoidance of having Sansa mention him in the going on four seasons since they parted way to be a very strange narrative choice.

Sometimes when the show and the books are getting too far apart the writers do a sudden "course-correct" to get the characters on track to where they need to be plotwise and characterwise. Shae went from being genuinely maternal towards Sansa as late as 4x01 to merrily throwing her under the bus at Tyrion's trial along with Tyrion, because that's what she did in the books. Cersei went from grudgingly tolerating Tyrion in Season 3 to remembering that she's always hated him and wanted him dead in Season 4, because that's what she did in the books. And so on. It doesn't always happen--I've been waiting for Tyrion to "course-correct" to his dark, brooding ADWD self, and I strongly doubt it will ever happen at this point--but it happens a lot. With Sansa, I expect that she might have some sudden plot-dictated epiphany where she realizes that she's always loved Sandor. It would be poor and confusing writing, given the lack of mentions of the Hound, but there would be precedent.

Going back to earlier seasons, it seemed like they were trying for something with TV SanSan but other things got in the way: Sandor's explanation about how he got his scars was given to Littlefinger because of some or other filming issue. There was a 2x03 scene filmed where Sandor got all up in Sansa's face and tried to get her to sing for him, but the scene wound up as a deleted scene (and just as well, because the scene was a hot mess). There was a version of the Blackwater Sandor/Sansa scene filmed where Sansa sang for him, but it was cut as well. It's hard to tell whether the TV writers downplaying SanSan is a conscious, deliberate decision or a byproduct of writing dialogue that mostly only serves to advance or set up plot points occurring very soon. If it's the latter, not much can be read into it.

The weird thing is that the writers are good at setting up plot points when they put their mind to it: we've gotten R+L=J hints across several seasons now. Maybe hinting at future developments in Sansa's love life is not terribly high on their list of priorities. The other big subtexty ship in ASOIAF, Jaime/Brienne, hasn't gotten much play in GOT since Jaime and Brienne's separation either, although it's gotten more than SanSan (Jaime mooning at Tarth, e.g.). Alex Graves, who directed multiple episodes of GOT and who preened about having gotten D&D to cough up future developments so that he could better advise actors how to play certain scenes, described Brienne as a lesbian, and I have no idea where he got that from.

Edited May 26, 2016 by Eyes High

[FemmyV]

2 hours ago, OhOkayWhat said:

And it is interesting that there is not a scene in Sansa story post-season 2 with Sansa talking about the Hound.

 

46 minutes ago, Eyes High said:

There was a 2x03 scene filmed where Sandor got all up in Sansa's face and tried to get her to sing for him, but the scene wound up as a deleted scene (and just as well, because the scene was a hot mess). There was a version of the Blackwater Sandor/Sansa scene filmed where Sansa sang for him, but it was cut as well. It's hard to tell whether the TV writers downplaying SanSan is a conscious, deliberate decision or a byproduct of writing dialogue that mostly only serves to advance or set up plot points occurring very soon. If it's the latter, not much can be read into it.

Has to be deliberate choice on the writer/producers sides. When Brienne met up with Sansa and was filling her on on Arya's whereabouts, she left out the fact Arya was traveling with Clegane and just said "a man." It makes no sense that the woman who marched up to Davos & Mel to announce, 'yep, I killed Stannis, all right,' would think it was just too indelicate to tell Sansa who Arya was with.

Conclusion: TIIC are either saving up Sansa's reaction, or trying to backtrack and minimize that relationship altogether. I don't really have a dog in the hunt, but I do think it's sloppy on their part; Seasons 1 and 2 Sansa/Clegane interactions showed them both well aware of each other, as members of the opposite sex. If nothing else, I'd expect to see Sandor consider signing onto Team Sansa in some capacity, but I can also see him keeping distant and staying the hell out of the Friend Zone.

[OhOkayWhat]

8 hours ago, SeanC said:

Twice feels like a considerable understatement to me.  Arya and the Hound were each other's major scene partners for nine episodes (308-310, 401, 403, 405, 407-408, 410).  Sansa and the Hound's meaningful interactions are a fraction of that; they have only two exchanges of dialogue that go beyond one or two lines, in 207 and 209.

Yes, and you are not including the scenes of 506 and 603, in them I find very interesting the amount of dialogue between UnJaquen and Arya (506) and Waif and Arya (603) about the Hound. There is a quick mention of Ned, Cat and the siblings, not mentions of Gendry or Hot Pie, but several lines about Sandor.

 

8 hours ago, SeanC said:

My personal favourite attempt at excavating a parallelism is arguing that the fact that both of them are shown eating soup at different points in the series is a hint at their commonality.

I am remembering right now about 5 or 6 of those cases. The thing is that many of those "hints" are an attempt to re-interpret the scenes of Arya-Sandor as a reference to Sansan, the obvious problem with that is that they forget the most simple explanation of those scenes: they are not reference to a third character, they simply develop the relationship between the Hound and Arya, there is not need of a further reason for those scenes existence.

One of the cases that make me shake my head when I see it in other boards is the use of GIF images of the Sandor "dying" scene and his words about Sansa tied to the phrase “He’s saying all that really mean stuff, but what he’s really saying is I love you." maybe there is another person who said the same thing, but I suspect they are quoting Alex Graves. The problem is that the way they put together the images of Sandor talking about Sansa and the quote makes the whole thing looks like the "I love you" is related to Sansa. And if they are quoting Alex it is not about her, it is about Arya. Here is that part of the interview with context:

 

She moved on, of course, without granting The Hound's wish for a merciful killing, something the character tried to make happen via a series of venomous taunts.
"I told [actor Rory McCann] during shooting that he’s saying all that really mean stuff, but what he’s really saying is ‘I love you,'" Graves said.
And why didn't Arya reciprocate with a sword to The Hound's chest?
"She more like her mother than her father," Graves said. "And he was on her list."

http://www.tvfanatic.com/2014/06/game-of-thrones-director-speaks-on-big-shift-in-season-finale-ri/

 

If there is some doubt that it is about the younger sister here is another fragment of other interview:

The Hound is presumably dead. What did you tell the actor about his death scene?
Everything he says is fairly ugly. The only thing I said to Rory was, "Everything you say is basically, 'I love you. Kill me.' " He brought in that sense of brotherly or paternal affection for her, and it is really not being returned in his final moments.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/game-thrones-season-5-goes-712195

 

I am pretty sure that they are not aware of the mistake, not even the original author of the mix (the gif images and the quote), but the fact is that the "love" word is related to Arya.

By the way, re-reading the interviews, I noticed I made a mistake in my previous comment saying the director thinks the scene is about Sandor love towards Arya. It seems it is about Arya moving on to another phase of her life. But my point about the director saying that Sandor loves Arya (in a not-romantic way) remains true, as we can see in the fragments of the interviews I included above.

 

8 hours ago, SeanC said:

I get the sense that the writers had a hard time seeing how to do their early interactions in a way that wouldn't make the Hound look creepy, given the situation (it's an issue for many book readers, for that matter).  But if SanSan is going to be a thing -- and looking at the books it's not an unreasonable bet -- I find the consistent avoidance of having Sansa mention him in the going on four seasons since they parted way to be a very strange narrative choice.

I totally agree with you on that. I have a theory about that. They never intended to follow the whole Sansa-Sandor thing as it is developed in the books. From the very beginning of the show, the casting of Rory made them to think about it in a different way. Rory is in his forties. And Sophie was very young when it started.That constitutes a big "no" for Sansan.

And even if Sophie looks older now, the problem remains that maybe lots of people still remember her as a very young girl walking besides Rory in his forties. Then maybe they asked themselves: now what we do with the Hound? . They kept the infatuation of Sandor towards Sansa, but in a low key.

And the real opportunity to develop him came with season 3 and 4. Rory and Maisie chemistry ended being amazing, maybe even more that they expected, with the advantage that it was not about romance and the ages were not a issue anymore in that sense. They also found they were able to tell a very complex story of redemption tied to scenes with drama, adventure and even humor.  And that is when they decided that Arya was the most important person in Sandor life within the show, because it works organically and also the audience loved it.

Perhaps I am wrong and they think Sansan is endgame in the show too, but I think that maybe there is some truth in my theory.

 

8 hours ago, Eyes High said:

It's hard to tell whether the TV writers downplaying SanSan is a conscious, deliberate decision or a byproduct of writing dialogue that mostly only serves to advance or set up plot points occurring very soon. If it's the latter, not much can be read into it.

My problem with the second option (the byproduct one) is that if that is the case then why Arya still talks about the Hound even if they are not near each since season 4? If Sansan is endgame why not give it more scenes than Sandor-Arya and why not make Sansa talk about him at least once each season, even if they are not together (specially if they are not together) as it is the case with Arya and the Hound. If they do not want to "waste" time on that kind of scenes, why they do precisely that (or at least something close to that).

 

8 hours ago, Eyes High said:

 

Alex Graves, who directed multiple episodes of GOT and who preened about having gotten D&D to cough up future developments so that he could better advise actors how to play certain scenes, described Brienne as a lesbian, and I have no idea where he got that from.

 

Some time ago, if I remember correctly, I was reading about the whole "Brienne lesbian" thing. And it seems that it was more the case that they decided to emphatize the fact that it was not about sex attraction even if the scene include nudity of both of them. I am not sure who said that, but it was not said that Brienne was a lesbian, the phrase was about looking at Brienne AS IF she was a lesbian in the sense of lack of sexual meaning between Jaime and her in the bath scene. And yes, I know, it is a case of very poor use of words. But I suspect they do not think Brienne is a lesbian.

 

7 hours ago, FemmyV said:

Seasons 1 and 2 Sansa/Clegane interactions showed them both well aware of each other, as members of the opposite sex. If nothing else, I'd expect to see Sandor consider signing onto Team Sansa in some capacity, but I can also see him keeping distant and staying the hell out of the Friend Zone.

They are aware of each other, but only the Hound is infatuated with her. It is not the case of Sansa towards him. I see their scenes together and Sansa, in my opinion, thinks about him maybe as a friend and protector but nothing else beyond that, at least for now, maybe it can change in the future.

Edited May 26, 2016 by OhOkayWhat

[SeanC]

7 hours ago, FemmyV said:

Conclusion: TIIC are either saving up Sansa's reaction, or trying to backtrack and minimize that relationship altogether.

I struggle to imagine what sort of reaction she could have to hearing his name that needs to be carefully hoarded.  Even something as simple as Sansa wishing he was around for protection, which the book character does a lot, would hardly seem out of place given all the stuff she's been through.  Though I suppose it's also possible that they realize that their interactions in the first two seasons are basically a writeoff and are planning to effectively start from scratch when the characters meet up again.

[Eyes High]

9 hours ago, FemmyV said:

Conclusion: TIIC are either saving up Sansa's reaction, or trying to backtrack and minimize that relationship altogether. 

Hard to say at this point. There is any number of possibilities as to where this is going:

1. No SanSan resolution in the books, therefore none in the show

2. No SanSan resolution in the books, but SanSan resolution in the show

3. SanSan resolution in the books and in the show

4. SanSan resolution in the books but cut from the show

As I've said, I think if there were some sort of change in the writing reflecting D&D's newly acquired knowledge of the endgame, it would have occurred in Season 4 and beyond. I didn't see anything one way or the other in Season 4 and beyond regarding SanSan. It's not "fucking confirmed," but neither is it dead and buried yet.

With all that said, in the show and the books, I think it's safe to say that Sansa's most important relationship is with Littlefinger, and whatever may happen with Sandor, I don't see that changing.

2 hours ago, OhOkayWhat said:

I totally agree with you on that. I have a theory about that. They never intended to follow the whole Sansa-Sandor thing as it is developed in the books. From the very beginning of the show, the casting of Rory made them to think about it in a different way. Rory is in his forties. And Sophie was very young when it started.That constitutes a big "no" for Sansan.

And even if Sophie looks older now, the problem remains that maybe lots of people still remember her as a very young girl walking besides Rory in his forties. Then maybe they asked themselves: now what we do with the Hound? . They kept the infatuation of Sandor towards Sansa, but in a low key.

Tyrion, Sandor and Littlefinger are all around the same age in the books (late 20s). They were all aged up to be played by actors all around the same age in the show (they were all just past 40 when cast), although TV Tyrion is supposed to be quite a bit younger than Peter Dinklage is in real life. If Aiden Gillen's Littlefinger can mack on Sophie Turner's Sansa--he's kissed her twice now, hasn't he?--then I don't see any reason why Sandor couldn't.

It was funny to watch Rory McCann squirm when asked about SanSan at interviews, though. Poor guy.

2 hours ago, SeanC said:

I struggle to imagine what sort of reaction she could have to hearing his name that needs to be carefully hoarded.

Agreed, but I struggle to think of other reasons why the writers would have conspicuously avoided having Brienne mention the Hound's name, unless of course it goes back to the writers not wanting any dialogue that doesn't advance plot.

Edited May 26, 2016 by Eyes High

[SeanC]

4 minutes ago, Eyes High said:

Tyrion, Sandor and Littlefinger are all around the same age in the books (late 20s). They were all aged up to be around the same age bracket in the show (early 40s). If Aiden Gillen's Littlefinger can mack on Sophie Turner's Sansa--he's kissed her twice now, hasn't he?--then I don't see any reason why Sandor couldn't.

The difference there is that Littlefinger isn't meant to be a sympathetic character; his sexual attraction to Sansa is meant to be creepy.  With Tyrion and the Hound, who are both meant to be likable, they conspicuously toned down any suggestion that they were lusting after her.

6 minutes ago, Eyes High said:

Agreed, but I struggle to think of other reasons why the writers would have conspicuously avoided having Brienne mention the Hound's name, unless of course it goes back to the writers not wanting any dialogue that doesn't advance plot.

The other explanation would be that the writers didn't want to sidetrack that conversation by bringing the Hound into it.

[Eyes High]

11 minutes ago, SeanC said:

The difference there is that Littlefinger isn't meant to be a sympathetic character; his sexual attraction to Sansa is meant to be creepy.  With Tyrion and the Hound, who are both meant to be likable, they conspicuously toned down any suggestion that they were lusting after her.

The show made it pretty clear that Tyrion did lust after Sansa ("You want to fuck that Stark girl, you just don't want to admit it"), although he seemed more conflicted about it than Littlefinger (which admittedly wouldn't have taken much). The show did tone down the Hound's overt shows of attraction to Sansa, though.

Quote

The other explanation would be that the writers didn't want to sidetrack that conversation by bringing the Hound into it.

That's what I meant. Anything that takes the focus away from immediate plot concerns is less likely to be included.

Speaking of omitted dialogue, personally, I'm glad we didn't get to see the long conversation between Jon and Sansa catching each other up on everything that had happened, because a) that would have been a very long scene and b) it would have gone pretty much like this.

Sansa: ...and then I married Ramsay.

Jon: WHAAAAAAAAT?

Sansa: Theon helped me escape. Ramsay was keeping him as a kind of pet and had tortured him for months. 

Jon: WHAAAAAAAAAAT?

Sansa: And then Brienne rescued us! She's a warrior who was my mother's sworn sword. She used to be in Renly's kingsguard until Stannis used blood magic to assassinate Renly. Jaime Lannister sent her to protect me and gave her a sword forged from Ice after it was melted down.

Jon: WHAAAAAAAAAAT?

Sansa: So are you going to tell me why you're not dressed like a brother of the Night's Watch anymore?

Jon: Yeah, about that...my men betrayed me and stabbed me to death. I was legit dead.

Sansa: WHAAAAAAAAAT?

Jon: Nah, it's cool, Melisandre performed a ritual and brought me back to life.

Sansa: WHAAAAAAAAAAT?

Jon: There's no afterlife, FYI.

....And so on.

Edited May 26, 2016 by Eyes High

[screamin]

On Wednesday, May 25, 2016 at 3:09 PM, Umbelina said:

I need a bit of sugar with my medicine.

I highly recommend Uprooted by Naomi Novik. Best fantasy book I've read in years. It has its dark moments but it's interspersed with light, beautiful throughout.

[OhOkayWhat]

19 hours ago, Eyes High said:

Tyrion, Sandor and Littlefinger are all around the same age in the books (late 20s). They were all aged up to be played by actors all around the same age in the show (they were all just past 40 when cast), although TV Tyrion is supposed to be quite a bit younger than Peter Dinklage is in real life.

 

Petyr, Sandor and Tyrion lust after Sansa, and that is bad enough, but only one of them kissed her, and that is worse, obviously. It is not a coincidence that Littlefinger is the only one of them that we can call a villain without a doubt.

 

19 hours ago, Eyes High said:

....then I don't see any reason why Sandor couldn't.
 

The question is not if he can do it or not. The question is: Do the showrunners need to do that with Sandor character?.

Edited May 27, 2016 by OhOkayWhat

[Eyes High]

4 hours ago, OhOkayWhat said:

Petyr, Sandor and Tyrion lust after Sansa, and that is bad enough, but only one of them kissed her, and that is worse, obviously. It is not a coincidence that Littlefinger is the only one of them that we can call a villain without a doubt.

The question is not if he can do it or not. The question is: Do the showrunners need to do that with Sandor character?.

It wouldn't have been appropriate at whatever Sophie's age was circa Season 2 (the character was only 14 as of 3x08), but in Season 7 or 8, Sansa will be played by an actress of age and will presumably be older, so if they are going to go in that direction, it might offset the creepiness to a certain extent. There are also ways to play romance without kissing necessarily being involved: Dany and Jorah had a passionate, highly emotional "love" scene in 6x05 where they declared mutual affection (not romantic on Dany's side, but still) without even touching. TV Jorah doesn't have to make out with Dany to convince the audience that he is in love with her...Besides, given what the show has done with Sansa's arc, pretty much any guy is going to look like a catch in comparison to Ramsay.

As for whether the showrunners "need" to, that depends on a bunch of things we don't know. If Sansa is doomed in any event (and I'm getting a strong feeling that she might be), the writers might decide to dispense with a romance element to save time and streamline the storyline. Even if Sansa is supposed to live until the end, if the SanSan thing doesn't amount to very much of anything significant, the writers might also decide to get rid of it (like they evidently got rid of Val). On the other hand, if SanSan is endgame and Sansa is supposed to survive until the end, I believe the writers would include it. So I guess we'll see.

At Balticon, GRRM apparently said that he'll visit Arya and Gendry again, but he doesn't want to spoil anything: "they're still very young."

When it comes to the show, at least, I think the best relationships are the non-romantic ones: Sandor/Arya, Pod/Brienne, Davos/Shireen, Jojen/Meera, Luwin/Bran, etc. Neither the show nor the books does romance very well, in my opinion, and where the romance has worked in the show, it's been because the actors sold the shit out of it.

Edited May 27, 2016 by Eyes High

[Edith]

14 minutes ago, Eyes High said:

It wouldn't have been appropriate at whatever Sophie's age was circa Season 2 (the character was only 14 as of 3x08), but in Season 7 or 8, Sansa will be played by an actress of age and will presumably be older, so if they are going to go in that direction, it might offset the creepiness to a certain extent. There are also ways to play romance without kissing necessarily being involved: Dany and Jorah had a passionate, highly emotional "love" scene in 6x05 where they declared mutual affection (not romantic on Dany's side, but still) without even touching. TV Jorah doesn't have to make out with Dany to convince the audience that he is in love with her...Besides, given what the show has done with Sansa's arc, pretty much any guy is going to look like a catch in comparison to Ramsay.

As for whether the showrunners "need" to, that depends on a bunch of things we don't know. If Sansa is doomed in any event (and I'm getting a strong feeling that she might be), the writers might decide to dispense with a romance element to save time and streamline the storyline. Even if Sansa is supposed to live until the end, if the SanSan thing doesn't amount to very much of anything significant, the writers might also decide to get rid of it (like they evidently got rid of Val). On the other hand, if SanSan is endgame and Sansa is supposed to survive until the end, I believe the writers would include it. So I guess we'll see.

At Balticon, GRRM apparently said that he'll visit Arya and Gendry again, but he doesn't want to spoil anything: "they're still very young."

Does this confirms Arya/LSH reunion? Also this could mean that Arya is back from Braavos (never doubt it) and in the Riverlands...

[Chris24601]

1 hour ago, Eyes High said:

If Sansa is doomed in any event (and I'm getting a strong feeling that she might be), the writers might decide to dispense with a romance element to save time and streamline the storyline.

I actually get the exact opposite sense from what's happening. I'm getting the sense that Sansa will almost certainly survive and end up with Jon in this story.

I'm going to pull in a quote from over on westeros.org because I think it is indicative of what even people familiar with the books and who aren't fans of Jon/Sansa are seeing, even if they don't want it to be happening...

Quote

"I dislike the idea of a Jon and Sansa marriage and laughed at the people who theorized it years ago. I remain unconvinced it will happen in the books, but I cannot deny what seems to be setting up in the show. I do think they are going to marry. They've set them up as Ned and Catelyn 2.0. For gods sakes they even gave Jon a cloak modeled after Ned. D&D do subtlety real well don't they? I think it's one of the reasons for the Sansa/Littlefinger scenes they wrote.There's nothing sinister at work with Sansa. It's a cheap plot point for one reason and one reason only. They're setting it up for Ned Stark 2.0 (Jon Snow) to steal Catelyn Tully 2.0 (Sansa Stark) away from Mr. Baelish all over again."

The bolded part is the only thing I really disagree with in that (well, and I actually like the idea of Jon/Sansa in a narrative sense). I don't profess to be a professional screenwriter, but I've taken courses on it and Jon/Sansa is practically textbook. D&D are not all that subtle or innovative with their storytelling techniques.

That minor roadblock of Sansa not telling Jon about her meeting with LF is the precise sort of obstacle that gets overcome by learning to trust each other more and making their relationship closer in the long run and is right out of screenwriting 101. Sansa will end up siding with Jon (making him King) instead of Littlefinger and unlike Cat, who begged that Baelish be spared, Sansa will let Jon finish off Littlefinger once and for all. Then Bran will show up with the news that Jon is actually Lyanna and Rhaegar's son and we get a wedding to solidify the footing of the new House Stark of Ned/Cat 2.0.

The reason why I think it will also happen in the books is because when you really boil down Jon and Sansa's respective happy endings they really are the same ending. Every other female PoV in the story is an Action Girl to some extent or another and while he has fantasized about Val in the books, Jon's actual vision of married life involves a rather traditional Westerosi wife (to the extent he even dwells on that... Val is just the vehicle for him to have kids in his fantasies). Jon's happy ending is to become the new Ned in a Winterfell filled with children named for his dead family members. Sansa's happy ending was to be a Queen (or at least the Lady of a noble house) and mother to children named for her dead family members.

Yet neither of them would have ether guessed that Jon was going to be the Prince in that particular fairy tale... nor how messed up and horrible the actual events that turned into the fairy tales actually were. I bet neither of them even remember what they'd dreamed of as kids after everything that's gone through. It's probably going to be enough that they've found someone who isn't intent on using them for some scheme or another and just wants to settle down and have kids without people trying to kill them.

But that's the story of Jon and Sansa. They started out as the ones who most believed the storybooks. Then they lived it in all its wonders and horrors. If they could see the love stories and songs written about THEM a century down the line they'd probably not be able to stop laughing... or crying... over the ridiculousness of the tales and claims.

That's exactly the sort of wonderful subversion of expectations (everything they wanted in the worst possible way) that I see in GRRM's stories and if it shows up on the show probably did come right from him.

[Eyes High]

23 minutes ago, Chris24601 said:

I actually get the exact opposite sense from what's happening. I'm getting the sense that Sansa will almost certainly survive and end up with Jon in this story.

It's too early in my opinion to declare any big endgame ships between living characters as good as confirmed or (conversely) dead in the water, but the writers sure didn't waste time setting up potential conflict between Jon and Sansa in 6x05. In retrospect, their gushy, even shippy reunion in 6x04 might have been setting the viewers up to enjoy the warm and fuzzies before the shit hits the fan, much like Stannis and Shireen had that beautiful scene confirming Stannis' love for his daughter to ensure that his decision to burn her was as wrenching as possible. As in real life, the more solid relationships in GOT are those not built on shallow Kodak moments but on a deeper foundation of hard won trust and respect; Sansa might jump into Jon's arms, but when push comes to shove he's just another outsider to her. Compare this to TV Sansa's relationship with Brienne; Brienne is someone that Sansa truly trusts because Brienne (literally and figuratively) fought for her and proved herself. 

If Sansa does align with Littlefinger against Jon--and the seeds were planted in 6x05 to suggest that the storyline could go in that direction--she's as good as dead, in my opinion. Outline Sansa's most important character point was that she was a traitor to the Starks. ASOIAF Sansa--and by extension TV Sansa--could well be headed in that direction, even if ASOIAF Sansa is unlikely to get to that point for quite some time. In the Inside the Episode segment, D&D made a point of implying that if Sansa was approaching Jon as a "clean, pure Stark," she wouldn't have lied. Sophie Turner echoed these sentiments in the LA Times interview, saying that Sansa doesn't have "the Stark way" about her anymore, due to her experiences (and resulting trust issues). Doesn't necessarily mean that she's going to go against Jon, but the groundwork has been laid for her to do just that.

[Umbelina]

Nah, Sansa messing things up for Jon by not exposing Littlefinger, and then a last minute save fits right in with:

• Boy Finds Girl
• Boy Loses Girl
• Boy Gets Girl

[amandawoods]

Isn't Sansa foreshadowed to go against Littlefinger at a future time?  I definitely can't see Sansa dying before she ends Littlefinger's life.  Actually, I can't really see her dying before she sees Arya or even Tyrion again.  I think the fact that Tyrion and Sansa both harbor some good feelings for eachother is foreshadowing them meeting up again in the future.  

I think that Littlefinger is going to be screwing with Sansa and Jon's heads by the end of this season, but I don't think she'll turn into a villain.  

[Unknown poster]

I'll preface this by saying that while I've read the books and seen all of the show, sometimes I get foggy about the differences between the two. I'm curious as to the difference between the two mediums a it relates to the Wall, itself. Have they mentioned on the show the magical properties of the Wall, or is it just a huge ice. Structure? I ask because I was thinking about the theory that Bran, now bearing the "mark" of the Night King, will inadvertently lead the WW'S into the seven kingdoms. (I'm willing to overlook the fact that if all that was required to get through the wall was just touching someone who will get through, that the WW'S have already had countless chances to employ the strategy. (At the fist of the first men, hardhome, hell, the opening scene of the books/show, etc.)

[Hecate7]

7 hours ago, OhOkayWhat said:

Petyr, Sandor and Tyrion lust after Sansa, and that is bad enough, but only one of them kissed her, and that is worse, obviously. It is not a coincidence that Littlefinger is the only one of them that we can call a villain without a doubt.

 

The question is not if he can do it or not. The question is: Do the showrunners need to do that with Sandor character?.

All three of them had connections to the war with her brother. Sandor was the king's body guard and did nothing to stop Joffrey's abuse of Sansa. Littlefinger exploited the situation in King's Landing to gain control of Sansa for his own reasons. Only Tyrion intervened, more than once, between Sansa and her abuser. It's Sandor's scenes with Arya that place him tentatively in the good guy camp. That and his desire to kill the worst person in the story: the Mountain.

LF isn't a villain for kissing Sansa. He is a villain for lying to Catelyn, framing Tyrion, and effectively killing Ned Stark.

[Eyes High]

44 minutes ago, amandawoods said:

Isn't Sansa foreshadowed to go against Littlefinger at a future time?  I definitely can't see Sansa dying before she ends Littlefinger's life.  Actually, I can't really see her dying before she sees Arya or even Tyrion again.  I think the fact that Tyrion and Sansa both harbor some good feelings for eachother is foreshadowing them meeting up again in the future.  

I think that Littlefinger is going to be screwing with Sansa and Jon's heads by the end of this season, but I don't think she'll turn into a villain.  

I can't see Sansa predeceasing Littlefinger in either books or the show, but that doesn't mean that she's going to survive. I think she's safe until Littlefinger dies, but once that happens, all bets are off.

I'm increasingly convinced that Sansa's going to die, and that this will happen before she has a chance to meet with Tyrion again. If anything, Tyrion and Sansa having a relatively neutral relationship in the show is likely the writers' way of tying a bow on that relationship so that there's no unfinished business between them. Also, Tyrion hasn't mentioned Sansa once either directly or obliquely since the end of Season 4. If the writers are trying to foreshadow a reunion, they've done a terrible job.

Edited May 27, 2016 by Eyes High

[SeanC]

15 minutes ago, Hecate7 said:

LF isn't a villain for kissing Sansa.

Seeing as he's only in a position to kiss her because he got her father killed and then spirited her away for his own purposes, that would count as villainy.

Quote

It's Sandor's scenes with Arya that place him tentatively in the good guy camp.

He helped Sansa a number of times in KL.

Edited May 27, 2016 by SeanC

[nksarmi]

In regards to divergence - I think the show is only inspired by the book at this point. I believe the end will more or less be the same - ie. how the seven kingdoms are ruled (the Iron Throne or separate rulers), who is doing the ruling, rather or not there will be magic in the world when the story is done, how the Others are defeated, etc...

But I'm not sure I would even go so far as to say that I think ALL POV fates will end up the same. I think some book characters could die on the show that don't die in the books. I mainly believe that because I think the mass consolidation of characters to keep the show in something that resembles a workable budget has probably led to deaths that GRRM doesn't need (for example replacing Selmy with Tyrion as Dany's chief advisor - sure he could die in the books to give Tyrion the chance to replace him, but he just as easily could live on).

That's part of the reason why I don't care what the show has done with Dorne or even in the North at this point. I believe some of these stories are so far off track that I'm actually not being spoiled for the books. It makes me believe I'm going to be able to enjoy both - if of course GRRM finishes the series.

Regarding Sansa specifically - I think her story will eventually - someday - led back to Jon and the North. But that's probably not going to happen until like book 7. I have been bored by her story in the Vale so despite not liking what they did with her last year (and actually I might not have minded it if they had kept more of the North remembers stories but that would have meant adding to the cast I guess), I must admit that I'm far more interested in her on the show than I was in the books. I actually kind of like Sansa on the show - not so much in the books.

I don't see much evidence for Jon / Sansa in the books but I think if they end up together on the show - than GRRM is headed there in the books. People here have convinced me it's definitely a possibility. I think the biggest thing making me believe it right now is that Cersei and Jamie are still together. I think the writers want us to have that image of incest in our heads so that when the cousin reveal comes - people won't think twice about Jon and Sansa. It will be like "oh well they are just cousins - people used to do that. The Roosevelts were cousins. Ok then. Well, at least they aren't twins!" Oh yea and Jon clearly has a thing for red heads. Just saying. :)

Edited May 27, 2016 by nksarmi

[KatWay]

I honestly think people are just looking for ships in a show which is pretty brutal on romance if it does romance at all. And I seriously, seriously doubt they'll have Jon and Sansa end up together. Those "arguments" are very much wish-fulfillment stuff. There is nothing whatsoever that has ever suggested that Jon or Sansa have ever felt any attraction towards each other, they grew up thinking they were siblings and mildly disliked each other. Now there's nobody else so they find comfort in the fact that a family member survived. That's it. People love Sansa and want her to end up with the hero (which Jon arguably is) and Sophie Turner grew up to be pretty but that's all there is to it. I'd find it more realistic for Jon to end up with Dany, his...aunt? or something? than first cousin Sansa. Not to mention, the incest of the show has always been shown to lead towards disaster - it destroyed the Targaryens and now it's destroying the Lannisters. Where do people get the idea from that it's romanticised on the show? Because Jaime and Cersei are such a happy, loving couple?

The Arya romance in the outline was when romance played a much bigger role in the story and their relationship was meant to be a major plotline from the beginning. Pretty sure GRRM just axed the whole thing when he deaged the Stark kids and changed around almost everything else. 

[WearyTraveler]

1 hour ago, Unknown poster said:

I'll preface this by saying that while I've read the books and seen all of the show, sometimes I get foggy about the differences between the two. I'm curious as to the difference between the two mediums a it relates to the Wall, itself. Have they mentioned on the show the magical properties of the Wall, or is it just a huge ice. Structure? I ask because I was thinking about the theory that Bran, now bearing the "mark" of the Night King, will inadvertently lead the WW'S into the seven kingdoms. (I'm willing to overlook the fact that if all that was required to get through the wall was just touching someone who will get through, that the WW'S have already had countless chances to employ the strategy. (At the fist of the first men, hardhome, hell, the opening scene of the books/show, etc.)

I get foggy too! But on that particular point I've got your answer.  The show has not even marginally implied that there's magic in the construction of the Wall.  I know because I commented in a no book talk thread that maybe the Wall was protecting itself (when the wildlings died climbing it with Jon) and got warning points for it.  At the time, I thought the show must have mentioned something about it, but it turns out they hadn't.  So, I stopped posting in non-book threads because I don't want to make the same mistake again.

_______________

Jon and Sansa may end up together in both, the books and/or the show, but that would still ick me out to no end.

And, yes, I know people used to do that (marry their cousin), but we know better now, don't we? There are valid reasons why it's no longer socially acceptable in most of the civilized world to do that.

I don't understand how anyone can ignore the fact that they were raised in the belief that they were siblings, even if Sansa thought of Jon as a lesser sibling due to his "bastard" status.  The fact that they are genetically cousins doesn't make their union any less icky for me.  It's like when the show Dexter had Deborah fall in love with the title character, who was not even genetically related to her at all but an adopted brother.  That felt all kinds of disgusting to me.

[glowbug]

For the most part, I don't think who ends up with who romantically will have much of an impact on the series' plot so I actually think the characters could end up with different people on the show than they do in the books and that many of the relationships will be vastly different from the relationships in the books. I think romantic pairings in the books will have more of an impact on character development and the characters' personal journeys, which I don't think D&D care to follow since they've changed the characters so drastically. It wouldn't make sense for Show Tyrion to have the same personal journey as his book counterpart because he doesn't struggle with the same issues. Brienne in the books has different lessons to learn than Show Brienne, who lacks her book counterpart's naïveté and is a much more hardened character. Cersei, while awful in both mediums, has more redeeming qualities on the show so her journey is going to be different. I don't take D&D's insistence on keeping Cersei and Jamie together as a sign that Jamie will eventually return to Cersei in the books. The show characters are very different from the book characters and therefore their relationship is also different. If Jamie is the valonqar in the books then I do think he'll kill Cersei on the show but his motivations and feelings about it will probably be very different. And while I am not a SanSan shipper and don't believe there will be anything romantic between Sandor and Sansa in the books, the fact that the relationship was downplayed and largely absent in the show isn't one of the reasons why I think that. So long as that relationship, if it happens, doesn't have major plot implications—and I don't think it will—then D&D might just have chosen not to include it for whatever reason (the actors' ages when filming began, personal dislike for the romance, Rory McCann's discomfort with it, etc.).

There will probably be some endgame relationships that do have an impact on the final plot and those will likely be included. For example, if Jon and Dany do end up married and she bares his child and then dies in childbirth (fulfilling Mirri Maz Duur's prophecy) then that will probably be included in the show. I'm not saying that will happen in the books but it's an example of a relationship that would have significant plot implications if it were left out. If Jon ends up with one of his cousin-sisters in the books he'll likely end up with one of his cousin-sisters in the show, although I could see D&D substituting Sansa for Arya if it's Arya Jon ends up with since it seems more agreeable to the general audience (I find both equally unpalatable and icky, not because they're cousins but because they were raised as siblings and I'd feel the same way if it turned out they weren't blood related at all). 

[benteen]

8 hours ago, Edith said:

Does this confirms Arya/LSH reunion? Also this could mean that Arya is back from Braavos (never doubt it) and in the Riverlands...

I hope so on both.  Arya might like Lady Stoneheart's "hang them all" policy but I think she'd be horrified to see what her mother has become.  Stoneheart is the Ghost of Arya Future if Arya continues down her dark path.

[nksarmi]

17 hours ago, WearyTraveler said:

I get foggy too! But on that particular point I've got your answer.  The show has not even marginally implied that there's magic in the construction of the Wall.  I know because I commented in a no book talk thread that maybe the Wall was protecting itself (when the wildlings died climbing it with Jon) and got warning points for it.  At the time, I thought the show must have mentioned something about it, but it turns out they hadn't.  So, I stopped posting in non-book threads because I don't want to make the same mistake again.

_______________

Jon and Sansa may end up together in both, the books and/or the show, but that would still ick me out to no end.

And, yes, I know people used to do that (marry their cousin), but we know better now, don't we? There are valid reasons why it's no longer socially acceptable in most of the civilized world to do that.

I don't understand how anyone can ignore the fact that they were raised in the belief that they were siblings, even if Sansa thought of Jon as a lesser sibling due to his "bastard" status.  The fact that they are genetically cousins doesn't make their union any less icky for me.  It's like when the show Dexter had Deborah fall in love with the title character, who was not even genetically related to her at all but an adopted brother.  That felt all kinds of disgusting to me.

Actually, this isn't correct. I know - I thought the same way. But at the end of season five on these very boards, when people were debating if the High Sparrow was accusing her of incest because of Lancel or Jamie (and I believe the charge in the show is just adultery but I'm not going to go back and look it up) - I found out differently.

From what I figured out via Google - marrying your first cousin is actually legal in most countries and it happens to be legal in 25 U.S. states. Also, the genetic diversity in first cousins is said to be enough not to worry about birth defects.

I totally understand where you are coming from, but as it turns out - it's not nearly as big a deal as we think it is.

Edited May 28, 2016 by nksarmi

[Chris24601]

Yeah, the hang up on cousins marrying is basically just a United States thing and even there its only been in the last hundred years and only in about half the states that even that's been a thing. Some cultures even think first cousins are the ideal spouses.

This is one of those cases where Americans make the mistake of thinking their beliefs are the norm for the entire world.

One of the main reasons for cousin marriage was that it was one of the better ways to keep wealth and titles in the family. The younger brother's daughter marries the elder brother's son and the younger brother's grandchildren gain all the benefits of being the elder brother's grandchildren as well.

First cousins, particularly those who are related by parents of opposite genders (ex. Ned and Lyanna), have no more risk of birth defects than of a woman giving birth in her 30's does, but one interesting and observed effect is that cousin marriages tend to be more fertile than the average and have a lower rate of infertility in general (the latter is believed to be due to greater immunological compatibility) so if you're trying to rebuild a depleted family line, a first cousin marriage is probably one of the more assured ways to go about starting the process.

If Rickon dies as many are predicting, Bran is impotent due to his injuries and Arya never settles down to marry then it would basically fall to Jon and Sansa to produce the next generation of Starks and, frankly, the more the better since the past couple of generations have proven that even large Stark broods won't keep them from being knocked down to almost nothing.

[screamin]

I knew a pair of married first cousins in the U.S. They originated from a small Jewish community in South America. They were religious, and if you wanted to marry Jewish in that community, choosing to marry someone in no way related to you cut down severely on the list of options. Two of their children died in infancy, which illustrates the problems with cousin marriage, but they were lovely people and had three kids who grew up and are lovely people, and I'd argue fiercely with anyone who'd say that that couple were in any way deviant or uncivilized. As Chris24601 said, the U.S. is not the universe.

[Eyes High]

I remember reading an article about the plethora of birth defects and genetic illnesses linked to first cousin marriages in England. Apparently, although British Pakistanis account for 3% of Britons, they account for 30% of British children born with a genetic illness. Any sufficiently insular religious or cultural community where the members seek to marry within the community usually runs into serious health problems in children (Amish communities have huge issues with genetic disorders). Of course, Westeros does not adhere to real-world genetics (or medicine, for that matter), so I think in-universe, a cousin/cousin marriage would not pose any issues.

I think the bigger sticking point for Jon hooking up with one of his cousins from the point of view of grossing out the fans is the fact that they were raised as siblings. From that perspective, Jon/Dany seems much less objectionable.

Edited May 28, 2016 by Eyes High

[glowbug]

First cousin marriage is rare in the U.S. despite being legal in half the states. The rate is 0.2% for second cousins or closer so even less than 0.2%. It's actually quite rare outside of North Africa, the Middle East and South Asia as well but in some of the countries in that region the rate is very high and of course it was common historically in most if not all regions of the world. The birth defect rate actually double for first cousins from 3% to 6%. While still low because birth defects are rare in general it's still doubling your chances. The problems actually arise when the practice is done too often and you end up with double cousin couples and a very limited gene pool  

But all of this is besides the point for many of us who find a coupling between Jon and Sansa or Arya off putting. It's the fact that they were raised as siblings that makes it icky. I would be disturbed if adopted siblings who had known from childhood that they were not related by blood ended up marrying each other. It would be even more off putting if they had been raised thinking they were biologically related and then found out in early adulthood that one of them was adopted and then decided to marry. Some people might not have a problem with these scenarios but many of us do. 

[Oscirus]

Yea same here. I have a problem with the flash's main romance for a similar reason and those two ain't  even siblings.

That being said, this show isn't exactly known for it's conventional romances so it could get away with it.

[nksarmi]

1 hour ago, Oscirus said:

Yea same here. I have a problem with the flash's main romance for a similar reason and those two ain't  even siblings.

That being said, this show isn't exactly known for it's conventional romances so it could get away with it.

See I don't in theory have a problem with Barry and Iris on Flash because they are clearly not related and his crush on her began before their living arrangement changed. My problem is that the show keeps reminding the viewers of their pseudo sibling vibe and then tries to sell the romance. It's very off-putting.

On the other hand, Jon and Sansa barely interact in the books (if at all) and certainly did not interact on the show. We never saw them exchange lines until their reunion. Neither the book characters, nor the actors look ANYTHING alike. The show has reminded us again that despite being "raised as siblings" - they had NO relationship prior to now. I truly don't believe they have any love for each other - other than, "you are my family, we grew up in the same house, our family has been through hell, we are all we've got left" kind of thing.

If Theon hadn't gone through what he did, I wouldn't have blinked if he and Sansa were paired together. They might have been raised in the same house, but they were not raised as siblings. I don't feel like Sansa was any closer to Jon than she was to Theon. So the "raised in the same house" or "raised as siblings" thing doesn't bother me when it comes to Jon and Sansa. It would bother the hell out of me if it was Jon and Ayra - because they did have a brother/sister vibe. But Jon and Sansa? No.

Now by the same argument I just made - I 100% do NOT feel like they are in love with each other in any way. I just think that GRRM could go there and so could the show. In fact, I would not be surprised at all if the show does go there - that they won't feel anything for each other until AFTER Jon's parents are revealed. So instead of it being a "I feel really weird about my half-brother - what's wrong with me? Oh, thank the old gods - he's just my cousin - I'm not turning in to Cersei Lannister!" - it would be a "So, cousin, not brother - huh? Wow, he makes a good king. Wow, there really are heroes left in the world. He sure has a nice smile. And I really like his hair. I wonder who he will marry? Well certainly not so and so, she isn't good enough for him. And definitely not so and so. Whoever does marry him will be so lucky - not like me. And why is he smiling at me again? I really do love his smile. Oh Ghost! Down boy! Stop it. I love you too, you giant puppy of a Dire Wolf!" and then in the end, it just won't seem that weird kind of thing. At least that's how I think the show would do it. Who the hell knows what GRRM will do?

[WearyTraveler]

Yes, my main objection is that they were raised as siblings.

As for cousin marriage, I'm not American, so I'm not one of those cases where Americans make the mistake of thinking their beliefs are the norm for the entire world.  I believe in science, and as others pointed out upthread, marrying cousins can and has, in fact, increased the risk of birth defects and can and has caused risks because it increases the chances of double cousins marrying.  I believe the main reason we, as a society, wouldn't want to encourage cousin marriage is because as we move further down the line, if we make a standard practice to marry a cousin, we'd be increasing the risk of birth defects even more.

So, while people who marry their cousin today are not degenerates or horrible or anything of the sort, it's simply healthier for the human gene pool to make it as diverse as possible.

Edited May 28, 2016 by WearyTraveler

[paigow]

1 hour ago, WearyTraveler said:

it's simply healthier for the human gene pool to make it as diverse as possible....

Craster's babies are definitely swimming in the toxic gene pool. Maybe white walker therapy undoes the damage....