S06.E09: Battle Of The Bastards

[Alapaki]

47 minutes ago, GrailKing said:

I don't buy that, she wanted to face him and tell him exactly what she thought of him, just like modern victims in a court of public opinion and courts.

She was bad ass before that; she survived. That scene is part of a healing process, she never thought she need to see him again.

I don't doubt that Sansa needed that encounter.  I just don't think the show needed it.

[screamin]

Quote

I don't doubt that Sansa needed that encounter.  I just don't think the show needed it.

So Ramsey should've died off-stage? After all that he did?

Speaking strictly for myself, I needed it.

Edited June 22, 2016 by screamin

[Nanrad]

4 hours ago, Misplaced said:

Except he didn't, when Sansa said "Ramsay will mess with your head" and Jon said "well I guess I won't think about what the messing-with-my-head outcome might be."  

So, she didn't trust Jon to plan, and she didn't know if or when the Vale troops might show up, and LF gets to swoop in as a true deus ex machina (which is the most annoying part of the whole thing).

Of course Sansa/Jon have now spawned 11 pages of refreshing discussion over their actions, so the show succeeded in getting reactions anyway...here's hoping we get some kind of an explanation next week.

I'll find it later on today, but even after disregarding the mind game part, he did ask her what her plan was or even how this would happen and she didn't have an answer for him. 

[Tikichick]

57 minutes ago, Alapaki said:

I don't doubt that Sansa needed that encounter.  I just don't think the show needed it.

I think a huge portion of the viewers needed the catharsis of that death on screen.  I think Ramsay himself would have approved, so much so that no doubt he would have thought to get Theon hooked up with HBO to make sure he tuned in.

[Gertrude]

4 hours ago, Umbelina said:

http://www.ew.com/article/2016/06/20/game-thrones-sansa-ramsay-dead

Seriously?  If that's all the explanation we are going to get?  Sansa throws a tantrum and lies because she's not listened to about battle plans? 

If this is the show's intent, it makes me even more upset. Sansa needs to be asked for her input? She's right there with the men while the planning is happening. If you're such a boss ass bitch, assert yourself and tell them what they need to know. And while you're at it, try to be convincing. Give them examples of his cruelty and mind games so they can get a better idea of the man. John didn't listen to you, huh? Well that's fair, because you didn't listen to him at all either. He kept telling you they had all the men they were going to get. Give him a reason, an actual reason to wait and he might have. Otherwise you guys were on a timetable what with Rickon in Ramsey's hands and that pesky threat of White Walkers in the North.

I am a strong book Sansa fan, but I can't get behind the show interpretation of the character. This was the episode I stopped defending her and accepted that she has evolved back into the selfish, whiny brat she was at the beginning. I hate it, I really hate it, but she is. I know she's damaged, has learned a few things, is harder and more practical, but she's still acting selfish and whiny.

[nksarmi]

15 minutes ago, Gertrude said:

If this is the show's intent, it makes me even more upset. Sansa needs to be asked for her input? She's right there with the men while the planning is happening. If you're such a boss ass bitch, assert yourself and tell them what they need to know. And while you're at it, try to be convincing. Give them examples of his cruelty and mind games so they can get a better idea of the man. John didn't listen to you, huh? Well that's fair, because you didn't listen to him at all either. He kept telling you they had all the men they were going to get. Give him a reason, an actual reason to wait and he might have. Otherwise you guys were on a timetable what with Rickon in Ramsey's hands and that pesky threat of White Walkers in the North.

I am a strong book Sansa fan, but I can't get behind the show interpretation of the character. This was the episode I stopped defending her and accepted that she has evolved back into the selfish, whiny brat she was at the beginning. I hate it, I really hate it, but she is. I know she's damaged, has learned a few things, is harder and more practical, but she's still acting selfish and whiny.

I find this fascinating because I don't like Sansa in the books, but I have enjoyed the hell out of her story this season. I perfectly understand why the actress enjoyed last season - some of the work she did with Alfie/Theon was really very special. But I didn't enjoy last season's story. This season - I have 100% enjoyed. Perhaps it helps that Sansa is now involved with characters I really enjoy, from Brie and Pod to Jon and Davos. But for a character I find very boring in the books and am not really interested in - I have been heavily invested in her story on the show for two seasons so I can't begrudge what the show is doing with her at all.

And I think Jon and Sansa are going to rock in it in the next episode. They won the North and now they will rule it together.

[lmsweb]

2 minutes ago, nksarmi said:

I find this fascinating because I don't like Sansa in the books, but I have enjoyed the hell out of her story this season. I perfectly understand why the actress enjoyed last season - some of the work she did with Alfie/Theon was really very special. But I didn't enjoy last season's story. This season - I have 100% enjoyed. Perhaps it helps that Sansa is now involved with characters I really enjoy, from Brie and Pod to Jon and Davos. But for a character I find very boring in the books and am not really interested in - I have been heavily invested in her story on the show for two seasons so I can't begrudge what the show is doing with her at all.

And I think Jon and Sansa are going to rock in it in the next episode. They won the North and now they will rule it together.

This, 100 times this. I was so bored by Sansa in the books. Even now, re-reading them and trying to picture Sophie Turner as Sansa in the books, I am still not invested in it.

But I am loving Show!Sansa. I love all her flaws and and ineptitude and watching her go from a Princess Wannabe to a woman in her own right. I don't expect perfection from my book or movie characters, in fact, the more flawed and complicated they are, the better. I don't want them to always make the best decision. I want them to be a selfish at times, and make bad decisions, and then get to cheer in my little heart when they do something right. I like to watch people grow and change - and not always for the better, because that in itself is boring and dull. I don't like to pigeonhole characters into Evil vs Good, Stupid vs Smart, etc. Some of the characters I found the most boring in the books have stood out the most for me on the show.

This show is never going to be all things, to all people. The fandom is so large that it's sometimes amazing to sit back and watch just how heated arguments over these characters can get. And that's NOT A BAD THING. It means that our own lives have shaped us to view characters in certain ways, and what one person sees as a flaw, another sees as a virtue. I love coming here and reading everyone's thoughts after each episode, and I have even changed how I view certain things after reading how other people have seen it.

And I think I may miss that almost as much as the show when it does finally come to it's inevitable end.

[lawless]

Quote

Not true.  Sansa wrote to LF two episodes ago.

Quote

Yes, but the OP I was responding to expressed the opinion that Sansa didn't want LF involved until the last possible minute within the context of her actions this episode.  So, I pointed out that she had, in fact, contacted him before.

To clarify, I know that she contacted Littlefinger before -- she would have to do so if there would be any chance that the Vale army could be in a position to help them by the time of the battle.  But we don't know what she said and what their arrangement was -- I was thinking that she might have told Littlefinger to have the Vale army in position and ready to intervene, but to stand down if it looked like Jon's army could succeed.  To minimize the debt owed to Littlefinger and the Vale, to the extent possible.  I assume the men of the Vale would be just as happy not to have to risk their necks in battle if it could be avoided, while getting some "credit" for showing up willing to fight.

I think Sansa's dilemma was that she (mostly) trusts Jon's character and morals, but she began to doubt his judgment.  She absolutely does not trust Littlefinger's character and morals, but she has come to trust his judgment -- and he had a fresh army to dangle in front of her.  Sansa reasonably doubted Jon's battle plans, his understanding of the strengths of Ramsey's sadism, and she doubted that he would accurately understand the danger of Littlefinger.  So she didn't want to involve Littlefinger unless she had too, to protect herself and Jon, and possible the North as a whole for all she knows. 

That doesn't mean she wouldn't have contacted Littlefinger days earlier -- obviously she would have to if the Vale army was going to get to Winterfell before the battle.  But that doesn't mean she had yet committed herself to getting the Vale army actually involved in the battle, and it would make some sense not to tell Jon about the possibility because he would undoubtedly take them up on it, unaware of the strings, if not outright dangers, that Littlefinger poses.  He doesn't just desire Sansa, he made Lyssa believe that he adored and loved her all their lives, manipulated her into killing her Lord husband and framing the Lannisters, and then he ultimately threw her out the Moondoor.  He successfully conspired to kill Joffrey, the King, grandson of Tywin Lannister, he's managed to take complete control over the Vale by manipulating Sansa's very weird, weak cousin. . . and so on.  Sansa knows about these things, but still doesn't know what Littlefinger's ultimate goals are, nor how she, Jon, and the rest of the North might fit into them.  I think Sansa began to realize that Jon would not be able to fully appreciate the risk Littlefinger poses, and that he would have been completely out of his depth dealing with a person like that.  Had Jon and the gang known about those troops though, it seems inevitable that they would have used them, unaware of the strings attached and the danger of getting involved with Littlefinger.  So if there was any chance Jon might pull it off by himself, she would have preferred to have kept Littlefinger and the Vale out of it.  But, though she doesn't know anything about battle strategy and wasn't in a position to make counterproposals to Jon other than to try to get more troops from other Northern Houses, she knew enough to see that things were looking grim, and decided to at least take the steps necessary to put the Vale army in play, if it came to that, hence the Raven to Littlefinger.  We have no idea how long the Vale army was there, poised to intervene.  Maybe they had just arrived, but maybe they were there by the start of the battle, and Ramsey didn't notice them.  Seems ridiculous that he wouldn't, but on the other hand, Jaime Lannister and his 8,000 man army just snuck up on the Freys so apparently that's a thing in Westeros.

[benteen]

Sansa should have spoken up at the war council if she had something to stay.  Instead, she stood there saying nothing while having a bug up her ass about Davos and then criticizing Jon's strategy for the 8,257th time while withholding information.  Again, I can't be mad with her because I literally have no idea what the writers are trying to do with her character.

[jjjmoss]

Hmm, Book Sansa is my favorite book character and Show Sansa is my favorite show character. 

Interesting to see those who like one but not the other.

[FemmyV]

4 hours ago, Tikichick said:

I think a huge portion of the viewers needed the catharsis of that death on screen.  I think Ramsay himself would have approved, so much so that no doubt he would have thought to get Theon hooked up with HBO to make sure he tuned in.

I have no problem with Ramsey's death onscreen, and no problem with Sansa ordering it. But if they were going to go the CGI route, I'd rather they'd have spent the money showing us what Nymeria's up to.

[WearyTraveler]

2 hours ago, lawless said:

To clarify, I know that she contacted Littlefinger before -- she would have to do so if there would be any chance that the Vale army could be in a position to help them by the time of the battle.  But we don't know what she said and what their arrangement was -- I was thinking that she might have told Littlefinger to have the Vale army in position and ready to intervene, but to stand down if it looked like Jon's army could succeed.  To minimize the debt owed to Littlefinger and the Vale, to the extent possible.  I assume the men of the Vale would be just as happy not to have to risk their necks in battle if it could be avoided, while getting some "credit" for showing up willing to fight.

I think Sansa's dilemma was that she (mostly) trusts Jon's character and morals, but she began to doubt his judgment.  She absolutely does not trust Littlefinger's character and morals, but she has come to trust his judgment -- and he had a fresh army to dangle in front of her.  Sansa reasonably doubted Jon's battle plans, his understanding of the strengths of Ramsey's sadism, and she doubted that he would accurately understand the danger of Littlefinger.  So she didn't want to involve Littlefinger unless she had too, to protect herself and Jon, and possible the North as a whole for all she knows. 

That doesn't mean she wouldn't have contacted Littlefinger days earlier -- obviously she would have to if the Vale army was going to get to Winterfell before the battle.  But that doesn't mean she had yet committed herself to getting the Vale army actually involved in the battle, and it would make some sense not to tell Jon about the possibility because he would undoubtedly take them up on it, unaware of the strings, if not outright dangers, that Littlefinger poses.  He doesn't just desire Sansa, he made Lyssa believe that he adored and loved her all their lives, manipulated her into killing her Lord husband and framing the Lannisters, and then he ultimately threw her out the Moondoor.  He successfully conspired to kill Joffrey, the King, grandson of Tywin Lannister, he's managed to take complete control over the Vale by manipulating Sansa's very weird, weak cousin. . . and so on.  Sansa knows about these things, but still doesn't know what Littlefinger's ultimate goals are, nor how she, Jon, and the rest of the North might fit into them.  I think Sansa began to realize that Jon would not be able to fully appreciate the risk Littlefinger poses, and that he would have been completely out of his depth dealing with a person like that.  Had Jon and the gang known about those troops though, it seems inevitable that they would have used them, unaware of the strings attached and the danger of getting involved with Littlefinger.  So if there was any chance Jon might pull it off by himself, she would have preferred to have kept Littlefinger and the Vale out of it.  But, though she doesn't know anything about battle strategy and wasn't in a position to make counterproposals to Jon other than to try to get more troops from other Northern Houses, she knew enough to see that things were looking grim, and decided to at least take the steps necessary to put the Vale army in play, if it came to that, hence the Raven to Littlefinger.  We have no idea how long the Vale army was there, poised to intervene.  Maybe they had just arrived, but maybe they were there by the start of the battle, and Ramsey didn't notice them.  Seems ridiculous that he wouldn't, but on the other hand, Jaime Lannister and his 8,000 man army just snuck up on the Freys so apparently that's a thing in Westeros.

Sansa's note asked LF to ride North to aid them in battle.  There were screenshots of it and some people deciphered most of it online. I understand having that opinion if you don't know what the letter actually said, but no, she asked for the army to come up and help them.  Here's what the note actually said:

"[…] you promised to protect me. Now you have a chance to fulfill your promise. […] Knights of the Vale are under your command. Ride north for Winterfell. Lend us your aid and I shall see to it that you are [well/properly] rewarded."

Here's the link to the actual work and how a fan was able to figure it out: http://imgur.com/a/p2mfe#jzGzmx4

[that one guy]

Episode description: "Ramsay finds himself in the doghouse after fighting with his wife and her family."

Jon was stupid, but it was an in character kind of stupid. "It's a bad plan, Sam. What's you're plan?" all over again. Sansa was right, about everything. I know people are arguing that she should have told him about the army from the Vale, but it was only because he thought he had a superior force that Ramsay put his army in the field. Even with the Valemen, Ramsay would probably have won had he waited out the siege inside Winterfell's walls. Like the Blackfish, he almost certainly had more food inside the castle than could be foraged in winter. Like Jon, his impetuousness was his undoing. But he never would have challenged the Arryn forces in the open field, any more than he would duel Jon.

Having Bran and Rickon's party sit last season out was a mistake, in that most of them have died this year and it had little impact because I'm used to them being gone. I was sad about Osha, and with this one I was incredibly sad about Wun Wun - giants are truly extinct now! Also, I felt there was more story to tell with Wun Wun. He was walking proof that the legends of the far north were true. But Rickon's death left me cold. I don't believe he's had any lines since the middle of season 4!

I don't believe Ramsay's line to Sansa about being part of her now had anything to do with her being pregnant. I mean, maybe she is, but he has no way of knowing that. What he meant was, I've turned you into a monster, at least a little bit. And she proves him right by feeding him to the dogs while she walks away smirking, a total Ramsay move. 

The battle scenes in this one were the best I've seen since . . . hell, I don't know, Kenneth Branaugh's Henry V? Sometimes I can't believe this is a TV show. I just saw Warcraft - admittedly, on a tiny tablet screen, but still, for as much money as then spent on that bomb it looks like a kids' cartoon compared to this battle. Props to, um, the props department certainly, but also wardrobe and fight choreography and horse wranglers and the Wun Wun effects crew.

This stuff is expensive. I understand that's why there was not protracted siege of Mereen like in the books - the Dothraki tearing into the besieging army would have been awesome, and also prohibitively expensive. Not to mention Yara's fleet attacking the Masters' Navy. But it took 25 days just to film the battle of Winterfell. This is why I'm not bummed that the last two seasons will be shorter - my impression is, they still plan to spend $100 million, just spread across fewer episodes. The shorter order may get us two major battles a year instead of just one, in other words.

All this discussion of the Mad King and his plot to destroy King's Landing again. Who thinks Chekov's firebomb is gonna go off next week?

ETA: The show has diverged so much from the source material specifically in the Sansa story, and for very good reason. They cast these child actors a long time ago, and as soon as it became clear that Sophie Turner is a major discovery and future movie star, they quite rightly decided to write new material for her. Keeping her hiding in Littlefinger's shadow for another couple seasons while Fake!Arya does the Winterfell stuff just didn't make sense.

Edited June 22, 2016 by that one guy

[VCRTracking]

Quote

I don't doubt that Sansa needed that encounter.  I just don't think the show needed it.

Oh I needed it! I would have happy with Jon punching him to death but it was so much more satisfying.

I like Jon and Sansa despite people saying the former is boring and broods a lot and the latter is whiny and an idiot.  I also like Arya who is by far the favorite Stark by viewers but as we've seen this season she can't carry a storyline by herself. She needs another great character to play off of. Hopefully she'll be reunited with the Hound or *fingers crossed* her siblings at Winterfell soon.

Rewatching the scene from season 1 where Tyrion talks to Theon after all these years because of the recent episode, I was surprised that Theon doesn't actually insult Tyrion all that much. He calls an "imp" but only after Tyrion is being a real jerk to him bringing up how he was a living among the Starks as one of them when he's really a hostage. I'm going to chalk up Tyrion's attitude as his being angry because he thought Theon killed Bran who he was fond of.

Edited June 22, 2016 by VCRTracking

[Gertrude]

1 hour ago, that one guy said:

I know people are arguing that she should have told him about the army from the Vale, but it was only because he thought he had a superior force that Ramsay put his army in the field. Even with the Valemen, Ramsay would probably have won had he waited out the siege inside Winterfell's walls.

You're right, logically Ramsey wouldn't commit his forces to the field if he was outnumbered. Guess what the show has shown us every time a giant comes across a castle gate? Mag the Mighty was able (with some help) to lift a massive gate at the Wall to breach the tunnel. Wun Wun had zero problem with the door at Castle Black. Wun Wun, with his dying breath, splintered the gate at Winterfell in no time flat.

If the show needs it to happen, it will happen. If the show doesn't need it to happen, it won't. That's why keeping the Vale forces as a last minute save is a writing decision designed to amp up the danger, not because of any consequence of plot or character. In short, there was no good reason to have Sansa keep this info to herself other than it made for better tv. That is why I am disappointed with the decision.

[Oscirus]

Quote

I don't agree.  If only for the reason that the people we've seen fed to his dogs were innocent of any crime.  The girl that Myranda was jealous of, a woman who just gave birth, and a newborn baby.  Three innocents.  Not the same.  Not on the same level.  No way, IMO.

They both tortured someone to death because it made them feel good. The fact that Ramsey was evil  doesn't change the fact that she enjoyed torturing someone to death. So, yea, she allowed Ramsey to bring her down to his level.

Quote

I don't buy that, she wanted to face him and tell him exactly what she thought of him, just like modern victims in a court of public opinion and courts.

She could've done all that and walked away but by torturing him to death she proved him right. Hell after the war, she was more concerned about Ramsay then she was about her dead brother. By performing that little bit of fan service, they made her character the final victim of Ramsay even in his death. And I'm sorry but Jon being cool with that is beyond ridiculous and way out of character for him.

I remember last year when Arya killed scumbag trant and that scene was played up as a tragedy now murder is apparently cathartic.

[GrailKing]

9 hours ago, Alapaki said:

I don't doubt that Sansa needed that encounter.  I just don't think the show needed it.

??? isn't the show about the characters and their stories?

I think she absolutely had to face him, it's a sign of growing.

[GrailKing]

10 minutes ago, Oscirus said:

They both tortured someone to death because it made them feel good. The fact that Ramsey was evil  doesn't change the fact that she enjoyed torturing someone to death. So, yea, she allowed Ramsey to bring her down to his level.

She could've done all that and walked away but by torturing him to death she proved him right. Hell after the war, she was more concerned about Ramsay then she was about her dead brother. By performing that little bit of fan service, they made her character the final victim of Ramsay even in his death. And I'm sorry but Jon being cool with that is beyond ridiculous and way out of character for him.

I remember last year when Arya killed scumbag trant and that scene was played up as a tragedy now murder is apparently cathartic.

I don't consider what she did to him as torture, a deserved death given to him as he gave others the last two were innocent beyond belief.

His is equal to the electric chair or guillotine.

It's a tragedy for both these girls, what they endured, but both these animals deserved it, isn't 2016 in their world.

[Hecate7]

On 6/20/2016 at 7:02 AM, Knuckles said:

Just two thoughts...when Sansa said, "no one can protect us" did anyone think of Arya?

And when Jaime said last episode, "girls like Sansa don't tend to live very long"...foreshadowing, or just that Jaime has not met the now experience-hardened Sansa?

When Jaime last saw Sansa, she was best friends with, and quite similar to, his daughter Myrcella. I think he had Myrcella in mind, when he said that.

[Hecate7]

15 hours ago, RedheadZombie said:

I don't agree.  If only for the reason that the people we've seen fed to his dogs were innocent of any crime.  The girl that Myranda was jealous of, a woman who just gave birth, and a newborn baby.  Three innocents.  Not the same.  Not on the same level.  No way, IMO.

Quote

She could've done all that and walked away but by torturing him to death she proved him right. Hell after the war, she was more concerned about Ramsay then she was about her dead brother. By performing that little bit of fan service, they made her character the final victim of Ramsay even in his death. And I'm sorry but Jon being cool with that is beyond ridiculous and way out of character for him.

Maybe death changed Jon. Or, maybe he realized that Sansa deserved to pass and execute sentence on Ramsey.

Also, her being more concerned about Ramsey's whereabouts than Rickon's, is logical. Ramsey could escape. He could do any number of very unpleasant things even after his defeat, and needed to be killed before he could implement some horrible plan. Rickon, OTOH, isn't going anywhere. He'll be just as dead tomorrow and she can give him 100% of her attention then. She has the rest of her life to mourn Rickon, but possibly a very short time in which to avenge him.

Edited June 22, 2016 by Hecate7

[Oscirus]

Quote

I don't consider what she did to him as torture, a deserved death given to him as he gave others the last two were innocent beyond belief.

Whether Ramsey deserved it or not, it's still torture.

Quote

Also, her being more concerned about his whereabouts than Rickon's, is logical. Ramsey could escape. He could do any number of very unpleasant things even after his defeat, and needed to be killed before he could implement some horrible plan. Rickon, OTOH, isn't going anywhere. He'll be just as dead tomorrow and she can give him 100% of her attention then.

If she was that worried about Ramsey and his elusiveness, she would've told Jon to kill him while he was beating the shit out of Ramsay.

[MarySNJ]

7 hours ago, benteen said:

Sansa should have spoken up at the war council if she had something to stay.  Instead, she stood there saying nothing while having a bug up her ass about Davos and then criticizing Jon's strategy for the 8,257th time while withholding information.  Again, I can't be mad with her because I literally have no idea what the writers are trying to do with her character.

This is where I am too. I love Sansa and understand that PTSD can cause people to behave in ways that may not always be most logical. I'm not mad at her and I don't know what D and D have in mind for her.  

It sounds like Sophie Turner's take on it is that she kept the secret about the Vale army just because Jon wouldn't listen to her.  I hope that's not all it is, because Jon did give her opportunities to express her opinion and offer suggestions. When they got shut down by the Glovers she could have mentioned it, even if she wasn't sure they'd come. When she reiterated that they needed more men and he asked what she would recommend on the eve of battle, she demurred claiming not to understand battle tactics but again, but she didn't mention the Vale army. There were at least three opportunities in the show for Sansa to tell Jon that she had written to Baelish and requested the Vale forces. She didn't. So, either she wasn't sure about whether she could trust Jon, or she knew Baelish's help is a double-edged sword or both.

[paramitch]

First off, kudos to Nick Rheinwald-Jones, for one of the funniest recaps I've ever read at PTV. I'm still chuckling.

Meanwhile: 

I'm stunned at the amount of foresight Stansa is evidently supposed to have shown. She is a deeply traumatized teenaged girl coming off not just a year of abuse, but of years of abuse going all the way back to Joffrey. And who continues to be overlooked except by the man who sold her into slavery (and who clearly wants her), and yet who is one of the few to actually talk to and treat her like an adult.

For those who still cannot forgive Sansa for her mistakes in Season 1 (which gobsmacks me), she already paid plenty. Immediately, she lost Lady, whom she deeply loved, and who was (I believe) her Starkian soul -- if they are all wargs, as I believe they are, then Sansa lost her chance for wildness and magic (and how many teenagers with crushes are faced with life-or-death outcomes after the first afternoon together?). Then she was systematically tortured and beaten and humiliated and caged by Joffrey and Cersei, married off as a child to a succession of strangers, and here we are. 

I will never ever blame Sansa. Not for a freaking millisecond. And I'm shocked at the amount of vitriol she receives.

She trusts no one. She had no reason to know Petyr would arrive (and ironically that brings a whole new host of problems, as we all know Petyr has a complex agenda, to say the least). She had no reason to believe her Hail Mary pass would work. Meanwhile, why speak up and give them hope? The war council had already utterly ignored her. She wasn't coldly sentencing Jon's troops to die first (sheesh). She simply said what she could to warn Jon about Ramsay (and was proved overwhelmingly right within the first 10 minutes upon the battlefield), then shut up, stepped back, and prepared to kill herself if they lost the day.

I definitely don't think Sansa was smugly sitting there sacrificing 1000 lives and shrugging them (or Rickon) away as the new Lady Stoneheart. I think she despaired of Rickon (smartly, if tragically) because she knows Ramsay and she was RIGHT. I don't think she was weeping over Rickon because she had already despaired of that day and because she was in public, and grief for her (as she has learned) is something to be felt in private. And I don't think a single smile at the death of the man who raped and tortured her, who killed her brother brutally before them, who tortured Theon (and yes I think this moved her ultimately), etc., is something anyone would need to apologize for. Sansa is changed, and it's heartbreaking. But I believe she is still good, and human. I root for Sansa just as I root for Bran, Jon, Arya, etc. She is a Stark. Nothing she gains in the finale of this struggle can ever replace the losses she or her family have suffered.

On 6/19/2016 at 7:18 PM, mac123x said:

Dany needs a saddle, stat, because Drogon's neck is getting too big for her to straddle and those spines have got to be irritating.

Yeah, when she climbed onto Drogon I actually winced for her. I mean, that does not look pleasant. Unless she got smart and wore something padded underneath her flowy gown-thing.

On 6/19/2016 at 7:20 PM, benteen said:

I loved Dany declaring that they all had horrible fathers.  So true.

This probably gave me the most hope for Dany and any kind of real character growth of anything we've seen her say.

On 6/19/2016 at 7:20 PM, Moxie Cat said:

Ha ha .... when the Vale army arrived to save the day and Ramsey heard the horn blow, I said, "It's the horn of Gondor!" Serious LOTR inspiration in this eppy!

It reminded me not so much of Boromir's horn, as of the arrival of Rohan in the nick of time at the Battle of the Pelennor Fields ("Horns, horns, horns. Rohan had come at last." Being the total Tolkien nerd that I am, I still get a little misty just thinking of that moment.

 

On 6/19/2016 at 10:06 PM, Black Knight said:

I saw both. Yara was certainly flirting and Dany smiled at it. I seriously doubt Dany/Yara are endgame, but it certainly can be a fun diversion for the both of them.

I'm so weird because the little moments like Theon and Yara meeting Dany are what I still look forward to most with this show. The battles left me mostly unmoved. But I loved Theon's genuine transparency and penitence and his total support of Yara. And I loved Yara and Dany meeting and that increasing realization on both their parts of, "Wow, I can totally work with her. She gets it." And heck yeah, like much of the viewing public, I totally ship Dany and Yara, at least for a few casual get-togethers. Because they would be kind of adorable together, honestly -- and Dany wouldn't have to play the games she has to play, for instance, even with Daario, as she attempts to play the role of "the wooed woman." They could simply have some fun and move forward with mutual respect from there. Although hey, I'm totally in favor of a pair of ruling Queens. ;-)

On 6/20/2016 at 0:51 AM, anamika said:

And why is Sansa not bothered at all about Rickon? Was she manipulating Jon with all the 'We have to save Rickon from the monster' and then turns around and tells him to give up rescuing their little brother before the battle?

I'm puzzled. How do we know that Sansa is "not bothered at all" about Rickon?? We see a brief shot of her and Jon looking stricken. And if it had lingered, I'm sure the same shot would have been of Sansa also looking resigned. I absolutely do not think that because she wasn't sobbing openly that she didn't feel devastated at Rickon's loss. But this girl has now spent years in statecraft, years of hiding her feelings in the face of people who would gorge themselves on her tears. Is it any small wonder she didn't show much emotion, reserving it for when she can process it later? She was on the verge of losing EVERYTHING in that battle. The loss of Rickon was just the first loss of many expected ones there.

I just think assuming that Sansa is skipping through the tulips over Rickon's loss is overstating things here, to say the least. There is absolutely nothing on this episode that says that Sansa was not devastated at Rickon's death, just as any Stark would be.

On 6/20/2016 at 8:00 AM, ElizaD said:

The Starks didn't win, they failed utterly, and the way things played out invited viewers to feel contempt for their stupidity, as can be seen in this thread. Ramsay, on the other hand, wasn't shown making a single mistake: everything he did was a success, and even losing his Stark bride due to his cruelty turned out to be no loss since the North doesn't want to be ruled by the Starks. Until the very last moment, the showrunners kept propping Ramsay at the cost of Jon's credibility as a leader and commander. Ramsay wasn't allowed to be wrong about anything, while Jon and Sansa couldn't be allowed to be good at anything: credit for the victory was given to Littlefinger and Littlefinger alone.

I agree with this to an extent. I really regretted the writers making Jon absolutely ignore every single thing Sansa had warned him about the night before. It made him look foolish, and I was furious -- he literally threw everything away -- the entire battle -- in order to take the immediate moment to avenge Rickon. The fact that he did not stop and think and return to his troops was really upsetting. He sacrificed lives to his own inability to control his emotions as a battle commander.

On 6/20/2016 at 8:07 AM, stillshimpy said:

I actually like the writers of this series in a lot of ways, but yeah, I think they do troll the fans sometimes.  Like having Ramsay lob out the head of Shaggy Dog  as proof that he has Rickon.  The writers know that the fans HATE what they've been doing to the Direwolves and  honestly, two big ol' closeups of "See?? He BEHEADED the loyal direwolf!!! Closeup on the EVIL."  

I agree (and more on my darling Davos farther down) -- although I was able to fanwank Sansa's decision to keep things to herself to a degree here. She had laid everything on the line to a man we KNOW she sees clearly. She knows that a debt to Littlefinger is dangerous and must be repaid, and that she herself would likely be the victim of that repayment. She had also told him in no uncertain terms that she never wanted to see him again. So she had no guarantee in any way that his offer was still good or that he would show up (after all, this is Petyr we're talking about). So I get why she might stay quiet, especially after being utterly overlooked in the war council discussions on their situation. What if she brought up her laughable pie-in-the-sky rescue/suitor and they all laughed? Where would they be with no assurances?

And yes, the use of the head of poor Shaggydog (yet again) was used by writers to maximum emotional advantage. It's gross. I hate the way they use the Direwolves on us like that. Especially since now we barely see them except when we can spent minutes watching them die cruelly.

On 6/20/2016 at 10:08 AM, stillshimpy said:

I'm willing to believe that last as the reason Davos has not asked, but it is unbelievable -- if it is any other reason -- that Davos would not have asked specifically "What happened?  How did she die?" for a lot of reasons, mainly because when a person loves another person, that is what they would do.  

paramitch and I have discussed why the show has not given us that scene yet and my position has been that it is because Davos will have to confront how much he has done in support of making Stannis King that went against who he is as a person.  That when he finds out Mel burned Shireen to try and make Stannis King, there is a list of things that Davos has also done, including leaving Shireen there in the first place.  So there are guilt related reasons but still, they're trolling the audience by spinning it out to the season finale.   

Ha, Stillshimpy, as you know, I am in total agreement on Davos. The thing is, this bothers me far more than any Sansa-related moment or plot point.

Davos has now spent whole NIGHTS alone in a room with Melisandre. He has now further spent DAYS (weeks?) in the company of Melisandre -- without bringing up Shireen. Without asking how she died. Without asking what happened. To a little girl on the battlefield who would surely in most cases have been safe from atrocity or killing. Even in medieval warfare, Shireen and Selyse should have been safe. So I absolutely cannot find this believable except that the writers want to milk milk milk every tear from us and keep us on edge while we wait for this inevitable revelation/confrontation.

I can acknowledge the idea that perhaps Davos feels complicit on a subconscious level, that he knew when he left (although I cannot quite go there) that he was consigning Shireen to a horrific death. But I still think he would have had the conversation with Mel way way way before now. And that bothers me. I expected the writers to make this feel believable and natural, and it simply didn't for me. And since it's the thing that irrevocably affected my feelings about this series (I will never come back from Shireen's death, ever), it's really a bummer.

Edited June 22, 2016 by paramitch

[paigow]

2 hours ago, Hecate7 said:

Also, her being more concerned about Ramsey's whereabouts than Rickon's, is logical. Ramsey could escape. He could do any number of very unpleasant things even after his defeat, and needed to be killed before he could implement some horrible plan. 

Which brings me back to the conclusion that she is still Stark dumb.  If she was worried that Ramsey could absorb so much abuse from Jon and still run away, why not order some wildlings to chain Ramsey up and continue beating him? If she is so driven for revenge, why isn't she with him all the time? Taunting, gloating, berating, sodomizing??? 

[screamin]

2 hours ago, Oscirus said:

Whether Ramsey deserved it or not, it's still torture.

In our world such an execution is horrifying and wrong. Because in those countries where executions are still allowed by a modern state, it is the ideal that the state be the one to carry out the sentence, not the victims of the crime. The state is supposed to execute sentence impartially and objectively.

Not in Sansa's world. In Sansa's world the lord of the land executes justice on the crimes committed in his land - including the crimes which he and his subjects have been victim of. It's absurd to ask the lord for absolute impartiality in the matter - and the subjects who have been victim of the criminal would expect the punishment to fit the crime. Sansa has been the victim of rape - but she saw the death of the poor old woman who Ramsey slowly tortured to death for the crime of trying to help her - a death of far more drawn out agony than any Sansa visited on Ramsey. After Sansa saw that, offering Ramsey a nice last meal and a swift merciful beheading would probably seem to her an obscenity of injustice for that poor old woman and all the people like her. And I'd guess most Westerosi would agree. The death visited on Ramsey was still a great deal swifter and less painful than he dealt to that old woman and everyone else he flayed...a starving dog is not interested in causing long-drawn out pain, he wants his meat to stop wriggling in a hurry.

And I'm willing to bet we will not see one single Westerosi express anything about the execution of Ramsey other than 'good riddance.' No one will find it particularly out of place or wrong in Westeros. So if we say Sansa did something horrifying and wrong, we mean we're judging her by our standards, not Westeros'. And if we are, why aren't you condemning Jon for either trying to kill Ramsey with repeated blunt force trauma after he'd rendered him helpless - that would be considered a barbaric method of execution in the US - or allowing Sansa to execute Ramsey in her own way?

Edited June 22, 2016 by screamin

[paigow]

30 minutes ago, paramitch said:

The fact that he did not stop and think and return to his troops was really upsetting. He sacrificed lives to his own inability to control his emotions as a battle commander.

Part of it was Jon realizing he was trapped - dead whether he retreated or advanced. He could die like his brother, shot in the back, running away - or die like a man/ knight/ warrior.

[benteen]

Quote

I'm so weird because the little moments like Theon and Yara meeting Dany are what I still look forward to most with this show.

One of the real strengths of this show is to take characters who have never interacted before in the books and create great scenes between them.  Brienne meeting Arya, which leads to Brienne fighting the Hound in an awesome fight.  Dany meeting Theon and Yara.  The writers beat GRRM to the punch with Tyrion and Dany.  Arya also met Melisandre on this show.  This is something the writers really excel at.

[DropTheSoap]

18 hours ago, WearyTraveler said:

 

Brienne is the heir of Tarth.  She has her own house, her own castle, her own vassal lords.... I wonder how Tormund would like living on an island

Being a woman, will she actually get to inherit Tarth? (Been a while since I read the books.)

Bit on Dany/Yara from the actors: http://youtu.be/ieopHE5MU6c

Edited June 22, 2016 by DropTheSoap
Add link to video.

[MissLucas]

On 21.6.2016 at 1:21 PM, OakGoblinFly said:

I am glad that Ramsey finally got his comeuppance in the end; though I was tired that he (once again) was the smartest person in the room, erm battlefield, and played Jon like a violin.  Just once, I want to see the good guys (or less bad guys) win a battle of wits (and no, Tyrion doesn't count). 

The whole scene was set against Jon. Just watching Rickon die in order to preserve his battle plan would have been read by everyone as a sign of weakness and lack of honor - delivering a severe blow to morale. The only other option was to borrow a bow from one of the archers and deliver the coup de grace to Rickon by himself. Stone-cold but it would have thrown Ramsay off his game for good and showed his own men how far he is willing to go. But probably the most Un-Jon thing ever.

Edited June 22, 2016 by MissLucas

[Advance35]

Quote

For those who still cannot forgive Sansa for her mistakes in Season 1 (which gobsmacks me), she already paid plenty. Immediately, she lost Lady, whom she deeply loved, and who was (I believe) her Starkian soul -- if they are all wargs, as I believe they are, then Sansa lost her chance for wildness and magic (and how many teenagers with crushes are faced with life-or-death outcomes after the first afternoon together?). Then she was systematically tortured and beaten and humiliated and caged by Joffrey and Cersei, married off as a child to a succession of strangers, and here we are. 

I will never ever blame Sansa. Not for a freaking millisecond. And I'm shocked at the amount of vitriol she receives.

If I were able to applaud for you I would.  I think Sansa is a girl that has had to internalize EVERYTHING for so long.  Of course she's colder and harder.  Regrettably for her, the Battle for Winterfell is VERY personal.  Ramsay has proven he will not rest until he has her back and on the other end is a dynastic mastermind that can raise or destroy Kingdoms through his schemes and has a palatable fixation on her.  She still has a very precarious road ahead of her.  One Jon might not appreciate because it's not an "Apocalypse" kind of problem.

For all the vitriol she receives I do think Sansa has emerged as one of the show's most popular characters.  She's certainly the Stark I see discussed most on forums and in news stories.   And a lot of it tends to be admiration or speculation with regards to what she's done or what she's going to do.

Quote

But I am loving Show!Sansa. I love all her flaws and and ineptitude and watching her go from a Princess Wannabe to a woman in her own right. I don't expect perfection from my book or movie characters, in fact, the more flawed and complicated they are, the better. I don't want them to always make the best decision. I want them to be a selfish at times, and make bad decisions, and then get to cheer in my little heart when they do something right. I like to watch people grow and change - and not always for the better, because that in itself is boring and dull.

I've come to love both the show and book version and this paragraph sums up why.

[Alapaki]

4 hours ago, GrailKing said:

??? isn't the show about the characters and their stories?

I think she absolutely had to face him, it's a sign of growing.

My point was that there were other ways of showing that besides having Littlefinger offer her an army, which ended up raising all of these questions about why she didn't tell Jon.

[screamin]

46 minutes ago, paigow said:

Part of it was Jon realizing he was trapped - dead whether he retreated or advanced. He could die like his brother, shot in the back, running away - or die like a man/ knight/ warrior.

I kind of disagree with that. He didn't die, after all. When Rickon died, he was likely on the outermost range of arrows - if he hadn't been, Ramsey could've had a volley fired and killed Jon where he stood. I think that if he'd turned and run back as soon as he saw Rickon was dead, he would likely have gotten out of arrow range before even a sharpshooter like Ramsey could reload and fire.

But to do that would have required him to look at Rickon's dead body, and immediately within a split second to put his grief and rage aside and make a cool calculated move to retreat on the grounds of pure military advantage. At that moment of emotion, Jon just couldn't do that.

[WearyTraveler]

50 minutes ago, DropTheSoap said:

Being a woman, will she actually get to inherit Tarth? (Been a while since I read the books.)

I believe so, because there are no other direct descendants. You go to the adjacent branches of the family tree when there are no descendants.  Otherwise, the females can inherit.  If, for example, Tommen had died before Myrcella, she would have been Robert's rightful heir, even if she is female.  If Tommen were to die now, they have to look at other branches of the Baratheon tree to find the next heir (e.g. Robert's uncles, if he had any and their descendants).

Males are before females in the direct line, but if there are no males, the direct descendant female inherits. If there are none, you move to other branches, usually working from the eldest male down.

Edited June 22, 2016 by WearyTraveler

[GrailKing]

19 minutes ago, Alapaki said:

My point was that there were other ways of showing that besides having Littlefinger offer her an army, which ended up raising all of these questions about why she didn't tell Jon.

Except the writers / author went or may have gone this route and it's what we have, it's the discord between Sansa and Jon created by LF, it's the next chapter.

Will Sansa be a monster, victim or a leader.

[benteen]

22 minutes ago, WearyTraveler said:

I believe so, because there are no other direct descendants. You go to the adjacent branches of the family tree when there are no descendants.  Otherwise, the females can inherit.  If, for example, Tommen had died before Myrcella, she would have been Robert's rightful heir, even if she is female.  If Tommen were to die now, they have to look at other branches of the Baratheon tree to find the next heir (e.g. Robert's uncles, if he had any and their descendants).

Males are before females in the direct line, but if there are no males, the direct descendant female inherits. If there are none, you move to other branches, usually working from the eldest male down.

Brienne would definitely inherit.  GRRM mentioned that a powerful brother of the ruling Lord sometimes challenge that claim (usually by force I believe) but the only other Tarth we know of from the book is Ser Endrew Tarth of the Night's Watch.  He's NW and dead so it's a moot point twice over.  Brienne did have an older brother who drowned and she's her father's only surviving child.  It makes me wonder what Selwyn Tarth would have done is Brienne had stayed sworn to Renly's Kingsguard.

Selwyn Tarth sounds like a really good man (Blackfish mentioned that too last week) who has a strong relationship with Brienne but I'd still love to see his reaction to her bringing Tormund home.  Probably just glad his daughter found someone. ;)

[WebosFritos]

I think I’m going to wait till the next episode to really form an opinion on Sansa and Jon’s decisions here. But there is one thing that makes me think Sansa didn’t really know whether the Vale army would show up or not and that’s her saying to Jon she wasn’t going back alive to Ramsay if they lost. Why would she say that to Jon if she knew a very large army was coming to help them?

I think they are both making mistakes and not listening to each other, which is perfectly understandable given what they’ve both been through. They care for each other but they have lived completely different lives for the last few years and I think they need to start using each other’s experiences to be a good team. I really don’t think there will be any backstabbing between them but they need to learn to communicate better. I’m hoping that dealing with Littlefinger together will bring them closer and not drive a wedge between them.

6 hours ago, Gertrude said:

You're right, logically Ramsey wouldn't commit his forces to the field if he was outnumbered. Guess what the show has shown us every time a giant comes across a castle gate? Mag the Mighty was able (with some help) to lift a massive gate at the Wall to breach the tunnel. Wun Wun had zero problem with the door at Castle Black. Wun Wun, with his dying breath, splintered the gate at Winterfell in no time flat.

About giants, was anyone else bothered by the no reaction to Wun Wun's presence? Everyone is always in awe when they see Danny's dragons (which is understandable) but they know they existed before because the throne room was filled with their skulls and the Seven Kingdoms kneeled because of dragons. But no one seemed particularly impressed that a freaking giant was fighting in Jon’s army even though Westeros didn't believe they were real before. And if giants exist, then some people should wonder whether wights and White Walkers might also be real.

[that one guy]

The more I think about this one, the more I think that, as with “Watchers on the Wall,” the episode itself was brilliant but could have had much more emotional resonance if more had been done to set it up beforehand. The straightforward good/evil thing was not really up to the moral complexity the show usually has, with the result that Ramsay’s “I’m part of you now” didn’t land as hard as it should have. Here’s how it could have been better – They could have included a few scenes of Rickon and Osha with Smalljon at Last Hearth the past two seasons. Not a lot, just like Yara’s raid in S4 or the check-ins with Sam and Gilly this year. This would have been important because Smalljon is a huge missed opportunity. Ramsay may be a straight-up sociopath, but Smalljon thinks he’s the goodguy. Here’s why – Tormund and Ygritte’s raids were in or near Umber territory. He had a duty to his liege lord – that’s why Greatjon went off to war and died for Robb. But he also has a duty to defend his smallfolk against raiders. He sheltered Rickon until Jon betrayed him by allowing Tormund and the Wildlings to move south and threaten his lands. This is why he hands Rickon over to Ramsay in exchange for Ramsay’s military support against Jon and the Wildlings. Putting some of this on screen would also have given added impact to the fight between Tormund and Smalljon – The desire to kill Tormund was the motivation for the Umbers’ betrayal of the Starks. And a lot of Northerners really, truly see Jon as a villain here, Smalljon and Ollie and Thorne are not the only ones.

[Hanahope]

1 hour ago, WearyTraveler said:

If Tommen were to die now, they have to look at other branches of the Baratheon tree to find the next heir (e.g. Robert's uncles, if he had any and their descendants).

That's sort of interesting, since before Robert, his family wasn't ruling the seven kingdoms.  Robert won the crown by conquest over the Targaryns, who were the first to actually unite the kingdoms.  So one does wonder whether the rest of the extended family actually has such a right.  And Robert's "children" being so weak (and illegitimate) is exactly why the North and Iron Islands were trying to break away anyway, not to mention the tenuous, if any, tie with Dorne.  

[stillshimpy]

I will never ever blame Sansa. Not for a freaking millisecond. And I'm shocked at the amount of vitriol she receives.

I am not shocked by this kind of reaction to female characters in books and TV and instead started wondering where the heck it comes from and why it thrives.  

Saying that Sansa is now on the same level as Ramsay confuses me, because that's holding Sansa to a wildly different standard from any other character.  Arya trained as an assassin, killed Meryn Trant is a gorefest that was beyond unpleasant to watch and isn't held to that same rigid definition of goodness, morality or worth.  Sansa visited a relatively swift, but cruel death upon Ramsay that was probably better than he deserved after his hobbies of torturing people for years on end.  After locking up Lady Thornwood in a tower to starve to death (in the books) and the list just stretches on.  Sansa smiles once at the death of her tormenter and showed him no mercy and she's said to be at his level now.  Just doesn't compute for me. 

Melisandre routinely burns people alive as human sacrifices and isn't put on the same level as Ramsay.  So what's the gig with Sansa? Or as I've wondered in the past, since it doesn't just stop at Sansa, but I've seen that kind of reactions to Betty Draper, Mary on Downton and a handful of other characters, what is it that just upsets people so much about this kind of character, and by gods and monsters, I think I finally freaking figured it out:  They all have one thing in common: they know they are pretty.  They just accept that as part of themselves.  

I started thinking about this yesterday because I was having an off-board discussion with Mya about that vein within the story, that Sansa is held to a different standard by viewers and readers.  It doesn't make me angry, or gobsmack me, but it does intrigue the hell out of me, because the character manages to achieve access to an emotional response in people that I think is given without permission and has more to do with our world than the page or screen. 

Anyway, I started thinking about how every single beautiful woman from stage to screen, magazine page and runway ends up saying essentially the same thing in an interview at some point.  "I never felt pretty" from people like Cindy Crawford, Michelle Pfeiffer and a slew of others.  It always sort of cracked me up while dismaying me at the same time.  Usually words like awkward are thrown in by the perpetually long-limbed and thin. 

Then I was also thinking about the handful of celebrities I've seen who will just take it as read that, yeah, they're beautiful and how that has gone for them.  I remember Kathleen Turner saying in an interview that when she was dressed up and looking her best, there wasn't a man alive she couldn't seduce (clearly a wild overstatement but it conveyed a lot of self-confidence) and Jessica Biel who said she was too pretty to be taken seriously as an actress and how that posed some difficulties.   Boy, did the internet just savage her for that one, although it's pretty much true.  Very beautiful women, with incredibly symmetrical good looks are often pigeon-holed into a relatively tiny role pool and then god help them if they age in Hollywood.   I also remember when Turner aged badly due to some illnesses that there was a weird level of delight over it to be glimpsed.  

So back to Sansa, I ended up wondering if it really is that simple.  That our world always sends the message to women that we should question our own worth:  Looks, weight, age, how you look in a swimsuit.  Forget that a the vast, vast majority of that is down to something over which we have zero control: our genes.  We tend to measure the worth of a woman first by how she looks and there's the unspoken agreement that even women who have to know they are stop-traffic-beautiful must never admit to it in word or deed. 

This created world really does that too. I started thinking about this when Sansa lobbed out the compliment -- playing by the rules of her world as she was taught them -- to Lyanna Mormont and how awesome it was when Lady Mormont shot that the fuck down.  

I think that really is it.  A character who dreams of being a Princess and almost achieves that, and feels certain she will achieve that because of her beauty, just triggers the anger that comes from that insane, stupid standard for the worth of a woman, because it leans into it, rather than away from it.  

Now Sansa has come many miles since then and even the books when she thinks she will be married to the lame (in this case literally) heir to Highgarden, Wylas she just hopes that he will love her at some point.  Again, I think that just tweaks that "this is the bullshit 'how are you spending Valentine's Day, are you loved?  That conveys worth!'" stuff from our world.  I don't think that a lot of the reaction to Sansa, because it's disproportionate to anything she's done on the page or screen in years and it's different from other characters, is all that related to whatever she's actually doing, but the things she taps into outside of that.  

I know it ticks you off, paramitch, because we have talked about this stuff at length,  but it fascinates me because something about Sansa taps into access to pain in other people.  Not the kind of pain that sparks empathy, but the kind of pain that is related to outrage.  

Here she doesn't tell Jon about Littlefinger.  There are actually good reasons not to, because what can she tell him?  "Littlefinger might show up, uh, because I asked him to and he once told me he'd do anything to make up for ...uh....the other heinous shit he technically did to me..."  For freaking real, what can she end up saying?  "I asked Littlefinger for his support" is not the same things as knowing you have it, or how that will manifest and this is the guy that suggested she marry Ramsay in the fucking first place.  It would have been hilarious to see Jon's face, but why does Sansa think there's a chance LF will show up?  She knows he wants something from her and what that likely is.  

And it was Sansa pointing out that they didn't have enough men to face Ramsay's and Jon saying that that was all they had, while fully intending to face him anyway.  There's no rational way to view the death of all those men as being solely Sansa's fault because she didn't mention that there was a possibility that a guy she has good reason to distrust, might show with the forces of the Vale.  We saw Sansa ask, we never saw her receive an answer to that request and the reason she thinks he'd do this comes down to "I think he either wants to fuck me or would like to marry me off to another person for a power grab".  

When Jon asks her what she suggests or has in mind, she says "I don't know" and....dude?  We never saw her receive an answer, she doesn't know.   

Theon killed two children as props and I've never seen him put on the same level as Ramsay for it because he's been so hideously punished for it.  Sansa has been punished beyond the telling of it for her own misdeeds but she can't put a foot right.  

Sansa just dwells in the Easy Emotional Access Category and half of me wants to shake Martin's hand for creating her, because the goal of fiction is to make someone authentically feel something for or about a fictional construct: Game, set, match to Martin on that one.    

[Morrigan2575]

^^^Amazing post

[Funzlerks]

I think Sansa's execution of Ramsay is pretty forgivable since it abided by the just desserts standards of justice.  You kill innocent women and babies by trapping them in with your dogs, you get trapped with the very same dogs. Ramsay had trained them to eat people.  Maybe if he hadn't trained the dogs to eat people all the time, he could have made it for a while.

 I do think if Arya had done it, it would be wildly applauded, or the same if any male character had killed Ramsay that way save maybe Jon.  He has such a high bar of behavior compared to other characters that he can't even risk his own life to try to save his youngest brother without being termed the stupidest person ever.  I do think the Starks get held to different standards than other characters who have done some dumb things.  It isn't like Jaime in Dorne was covering himself in glory.

Female characters who aren't tomboys usually get treated pretty rough.  Danerys isn't a tomboy, but she has magical powers that eclipse any adversary's.  I have liked that two of the main female characters subvert the traditional idea that a good girl is a 100 pound ass kicking machine who doesn't even know she is so beautiful.  Really, none of the female characters fall into that cliche, but Danerys and Sansa know they are attractive and often attempt to use it to their advantage.  They never whine about not being male.  To me, GRRM has been one of the few male authors that I have thought could get into the heads of female characters to my liking.  Danerys had some very problematic moments in the first book, but after that I thought Martin got it together with her as a woman.

[paigow]

14 minutes ago, Funzlerks said:

To me, GRRM has been one of the few male authors that I have thought could get into the heads of female characters to my liking.  Danerys had some very problematic moments in the first book, but after that I thought Martin got it together with her as a woman.

10 points for whoever finishes this movie quote.... btw these are Whose Line Is It Anyway points

Female Fan: How do you write women so well?

Famous Author: I start with a man ....

[paramitch]

Game, set, match: Thank you. Your argument was far more complex than Martin's. 

This:

1 hour ago, stillshimpy said:

I am not shocked by this kind of reaction to female characters in books and TV and instead started wondering where the heck it comes from and why it thrives.  

Saying that Sansa is now on the same level as Ramsay confuses me, because that's holding Sansa to a wildly different standard from any other character.  Arya trained as an assassin, killed Meryn Trant is a gorefest that was beyond unpleasant to watch and isn't held to that same rigid definition of goodness, morality or worth.  Sansa visited a relatively swift, but cruel death upon Ramsay that was probably better than he deserved after his hobbies of torturing people for years on end.  After locking up Lady Thornwood in a tower to starve to death (in the books) and the list just stretches on.  Sansa smiles once at the death of her tormenter and showed him no mercy and she's said to be at his level now.  Just doesn't compute for me. 

Melisandre routinely burns people alive as human sacrifices and isn't put on the same level as Ramsay.  So what's the gig with Sansa? Or as I've wondered in the past, since it doesn't just stop at Sansa, but I've seen that kind of reactions to Betty Draper, Mary on Downton and a handful of other characters, what is it that just upsets people so much about this kind of character, and by gods and monsters, I think I finally freaking figured it out:  They all have one thing in common: they know they are pretty.  They just accept that as part of themselves.  

I started thinking about this yesterday because I was having an off-board discussion with Mya about that vein within the story, that Sansa is held to a different standard by viewers and readers.  It doesn't make me angry, or gobsmack me, but it does intrigue the hell out of me, because the character manages to achieve access to an emotional response in people that I think is given without permission and has more to do with our world than the page or screen. 

Anyway, I started thinking about how every single beautiful woman from stage to screen, magazine page and runway ends up saying essentially the same thing in an interview at some point.  "I never felt pretty" from people like Cindy Crawford, Michelle Pfeiffer and a slew of others.  It always sort of cracked me up while dismaying me at the same time.  Usually words like awkward are thrown in by the perpetually long-limbed and thin. 

Then I was also thinking about the handful of celebrities I've seen who will just take it as read that, yeah, they're beautiful and how that has gone for them.  I remember Kathleen Turner saying in an interview that when she was dressed up and looking her best, there wasn't a man alive she couldn't seduce (clearly a wild overstatement but it conveyed a lot of self-confidence) and Jessica Biel who said she was too pretty to be taken seriously as an actress and how that posed some difficulties.   Boy, did the internet just savage her for that one, although it's pretty much true.  Very beautiful women, with incredibly symmetrical good looks are often pigeon-holed into a relatively tiny role pool and then god help them if they age in Hollywood.   I also remember when Turner aged badly due to some illnesses that there was a weird level of delight over it to be glimpsed.  

So back to Sansa, I ended up wondering if it really is that simple.  That our world always sends the message to women that we should question our own worth:  Looks, weight, age, how you look in a swimsuit.  Forget that a the vast, vast majority of that is down to something over which we have zero control: our genes.  We tend to measure the worth of a woman first by how she looks and there's the unspoken agreement that even women who have to know they are stop-traffic-beautiful must never admit to it in word or deed. 

This created world really does that too. I started thinking about this when Sansa lobbed out the compliment -- playing by the rules of her world as she was taught them -- to Lyanna Mormont and how awesome it was when Lady Mormont shot that the fuck down.  

I think that really is it.  A character who dreams of being a Princess and almost achieves that, and feels certain she will achieve that because of her beauty, just triggers the anger that comes from that insane, stupid standard for the worth of a woman, because it leans into it, rather than away from it.  

Now Sansa has come many miles since then and even the books when she thinks she will be married to the lame (in this case literally) heir to Highgarden, Wylas she just hopes that he will love her at some point.  Again, I think that just tweaks that "this is the bullshit 'how are you spending Valentine's Day, are you loved?  That conveys worth!'" stuff from our world.  I don't think that a lot of the reaction to Sansa, because it's disproportionate to anything she's done on the page or screen in years and it's different from other characters, is all that related to whatever she's actually doing, but the things she taps into outside of that.  

I know it ticks you off, paramitch, because we have talked about this stuff at length,  but it fascinates me because something about Sansa taps into access to pain in other people.  Not the kind of pain that sparks empathy, but the kind of pain that is related to outrage.  

Here she doesn't tell Jon about Littlefinger.  There are actually good reasons not to, because what can she tell him?  "Littlefinger might show up, uh, because I asked him to and he once told me he'd do anything to make up for ...uh....the other heinous shit he technically did to me..."  For freaking real, what can she end up saying?  "I asked Littlefinger for his support" is not the same things as knowing you have it, or how that will manifest and this is the guy that suggested she marry Ramsay in the fucking first place.  It would have been hilarious to see Jon's face, but why does Sansa think there's a chance LF will show up?  She knows he wants something from her and what that likely is.  

And it was Sansa pointing out that they didn't have enough men to face Ramsay's and Jon saying that that was all they had, while fully intending to face him anyway.  There's no rational way to view the death of all those men as being solely Sansa's fault because she didn't mention that there was a possibility that a guy she has good reason to distrust, might show with the forces of the Vale.  We saw Sansa ask, we never saw her receive an answer to that request and the reason she thinks he'd do this comes down to "I think he either wants to fuck me or would like to marry me off to another person for a power grab".  

When Jon asks her what she suggests or has in mind, she says "I don't know" and....dude?  We never saw her receive an answer, she doesn't know.   

Theon killed two children as props and I've never seen him put on the same level as Ramsay for it because he's been so hideously punished for it.  Sansa has been punished beyond the telling of it for her own misdeeds but she can't put a foot right.  

Sansa just dwells in the Easy Emotional Access Category and half of me wants to shake Martin's hand for creating her, because the goal of fiction is to make someone authentically feel something for or about a fictional construct: Game, set, match to Martin on that one.    

 

Beautifully put. Sansa is a VICTIM. Not a villain. She deserves nothing but sympathy  as far as the "game" the other characters are playing. She has lost everything: her father, mother, siblings, friends, pets, family, kingdom, body, and mind.

What more do people want from her? She's irrevocably damaged and still (heroically) fighting for the right side.

Want an accurate read on Sansa's state of mind? Check back with her in a decade. Maybe. Kind of. If she's still alive.

Edited June 22, 2016 by paramitch
coherence and quote issues

[scottiB]

3 hours ago, screamin said:

I kind of disagree with that. He didn't die, after all. When Rickon died, he was likely on the outermost range of arrows - if he hadn't been, Ramsey could've had a volley fired and killed Jon where he stood. <snip>

He wasn't on the outermost range; Jon was definitely within range. Once he rode toward the line, Jon just avoided an arrow volley that hit all around Rickon's body (striking Rickon 3-4 more times). Jon rode forward to close the distance and not get struck. And once moving forward, (I believe) he figured. "What the hell, keep going."

[Oscirus]

Quote

So if we say Sansa did something horrifying and wrong, we mean we're judging her by our standards, not Westeros'. And if we are, why aren't you condemning Jon for either trying to kill Ramsey with repeated blunt force trauma after he'd rendered him helpless - that would be considered a barbaric method of execution in the US - or allowing Sansa to execute Ramsey in her own way?

I'm not holding Sansa to my standards, I'm holding her to the standards set by her father.  What do you think Ned's reaction would be to her doing something like that? As for why I don't hold Jon to the same standards, I repeatedly have. I've said  that leaving Ramsay for Sansa as a gift is not something that he would do.

 

Quote

Arya trained as an assassin, killed Meryn Trant is a gorefest that was beyond unpleasant to watch and isn't held to that same rigid definition of goodness, morality or worth.  Sansa visited a relatively swift, but cruel death upon Ramsay that was probably better than he deserved after his hobbies of torturing people for years on end.

Arya's murder was played as tragic and horrifying while Sansa's was played as empowering. Sansa's Ramsay execution served no other purpose in the narrative other then to  make sure that the audience sees Sansa give Ramsay what he deserved.

Sansa knowing that she's beautiful is not the problem, Sansa being a woman is not the problem, the writers bending over backwards  to conform their story to give her bad ass moments is.

She withholds information from the one person in the world that is the most concerned about her welfare and we're not supposed to question that?

She gets off on torturing someone to death  and we're supposed to hand wave it away  because the person in question  deserved it?

Look at Bran and look how much hate he got for his mistake and he didn't get anywhere near the defense that she does.

If her detractors are holding her to a different standard then so are her supporters.

[Gertrude]

It feels kind of strange to be on the other side of the Sansa battle lines. I am a strong supporter of Sansa in the books, and I defended her for so much of the series. I just finally reached a breaking point with the show and I am tired of fanwanking what we are shown on screen. It was easy to do that early on because I had book character and motivations to guide me and course correct. I don't think the show ever really had a good handle on Sansa and since we are off book so much, it's showing.

I don't blame the character Sansa for anything, I'm mad at the writers for (as I see it) diminishing a character I really, really like and admire in the books. It's not that anything she did in this episode was unforgivable and wrong - it's a cumulative thing and I am pretty much done with it. I am sick of how it seems they know what they want Sansa to be, but don't know how to get her there in a satisfactory way. Last year her strength was mainly shown by being surly and sulky towards the Boltons. I'm specifically talking about before the wedding where she snarks at dinner and sasses Miranda. On the road she was even sulky towards Littlefinger. These all reminded me very much of how she treated her septa in King's Landing - all sulky and teen angsty. (don't get me wrong, it makes sense that she's a bratty teen, but Book Sansa was more of a snob than a mean girl and if I'm being reminded of season 1, then where is the character growth?) She has been coming off as whiny and sulky for a while - don't know if it's the writing or the acting, but that's what I am seeing. In this episode when she gets angry that Jon didn't ask her for input ... well, she was right there the whole time and in the days/weeks/months leading up to this point. Maybe a strong woman would speak up? So I think they needed this conversation to happen at this point so we see exactly how Jon messes things up. Fine, but they couldn't find a better way to do that than make Sansa whine? These are my issues that are small on their own, but over time make me cry.

I dislike how she was talked into a Bolton wedding to get revenge when really, it makes zero sense. When the writers decided to show us Dark Sansa at the end of season 4 only to not follow up on that promise. Yes, I get that character growth is not always in a straight line, but neither is it very satisfactory to watch in a drama. I can't figure out what Sansa's motives are and why she does what she does anymore and it's frustrating.

As for the dog scene at the end, yeah, I do think Ramsey brought her down to his level. I don't think it's a permanent feature (I fervently hope not), but it's also disturbing. I don't actually have a problem with the method of execution or that she watched. I admire her for watching. I disliked that she enjoyed it even a little bit. I don't think it's a fault, it just makes me fearful for her. Ramsey was right - he's a part of her and I want her to put him behind her for good. Sansa's last words to Ramsey were perfect, and I loved that part.

And yes, I was horrified at Arya's revenge killing of Trant. Again, not at the killing itself (which should probably disturb me more, tbh) but that it was so over the top and ritualistic and that Arya was clearly relishing it. I cheer for Arya in the sense that I am really hoping someone eventually gives her lots of hugs and a mug of hot chocolate.

[stagmania]

13 hours ago, benteen said:

Sansa should have spoken up at the war council if she had something to stay.  Instead, she stood there saying nothing while having a bug up her ass about Davos and then criticizing Jon's strategy for the 8,257th time while withholding information.  Again, I can't be mad with her because I literally have no idea what the writers are trying to do with her character.

If that scene was supposed to show us Jon dismissing Sansa and giving her a reason to withhold her secret plan as payback (as Sophie Turner implies in that interview), it failed. What I saw was Jon responding when she said she could contribute and inviting her to do so, then her offering a few vague warnings about what kind of person Ramsey is and holding back crucial information. There have been theories about her reasons stated in this forum that are a lot more plausible to me than the idea that she was justified in lying because Jon doesn't respect her. Once again, it seems that the creators are just entirely out of step with the way the story comes across on screen.

As for the larger discussion about people's reactions to Sansa, I do agree that she is often held to an unfair standard and subject to harsh judgment from fans. I just don't agree that people's confusion around this particular plot point is part of that trend. Her motivations as shown on screen and stated by the creators simply don't make sense. 

Edited June 22, 2016 by stagmania

[benteen]

Quote

About giants, was anyone else bothered by the no reaction to Wun Wun's presence? Everyone is always in awe when they see Danny's dragons (which is understandable) but they know they existed before because the throne room was filled with their skulls and the Seven Kingdoms kneeled because of dragons. But no one seemed particularly impressed that a freaking giant was fighting in Jon’s army even though Westeros didn't believe they were real before. And if giants exist, then some people should wonder whether wights and White Walkers might also be real.

Agreed.  No one seems in awe that there's a giant on the battlefield, that some of the legends about the Wall (that it was built by giants under the eye of Brandon Stark) and what's beyond it are true.  Littlefinger, someone you know doesn't believe in the White Walkers or magic at all, saw Wun Wun in the battlefield.  Yet no one thinks "Holy shit!  That's a giant!" is strange.  They needed to sell that a lot more.

[HumblePi]

Sansa Stark had no solid character temperament throughout multiple seasons albeit that of a sympathy-worthy 'girl' who got into a lot of self created difficulties, such as her desire to be the wife and queen of Joffrey Baratheon. In spite of her suspicion that he was a clinical sociopath, her desire to sit on a high throne and have regally advantaged children simply mitigated those fears. She was 'highborn' and the privileged daughter of Ned and Catelyn Stark, a woman who was aware that she was of the blood of mighty rulers. I think that viewers disliked Sansa in the beginning because she was spoiled and hopelessly naive and lost in her dreams of pretty princes and dashing knights. But, she was just a teen and isn't that how a lot of teens are? Now that Sansa has evolved into who she became, some viewers don't care for her because the “strong female character” that can be brutal seems to suggest that femininity is still bad, and that women can only be strong by adopting stereotypical male roles and attitudes. It nearly destroyed Sansa being what people think the 'ideal woman' should be. Even though women are told they are only “good” if they fit into this role of femininity, the role itself is seen as weak, manipulative, stupid and generally inferior.

I was aware that the writing was slanted against Sansa in many ways, making her a fragile and almost pathetic person who we really disliked because of her vulnerabilities. Now that she's 'been through the mill' so to speak, we're going to criticize her for being strong and vengeful. I had known that it was inevitable, that Sansa could not take this much disgrace, humiliation and manipulation without eventually fighting back. I like Sansa now and didn't like her at all before. She had two options really, shrivel up and tow the mark according to the direction of her male counterparts, or grow a spine, plot and plan revenge on her own terms without being told how to do it, when to do it or questioned as to why she's even doing it.

[Gertrude]

Imagine their reaction to a giant with a club or even just a tree trunk? But no, Wun Wun doesn't get a weapon because that would make him more effective on the battlefield and thus lessen the artificial drama offered to us for the battle.

To be clear, the battle itself was beautifully shot and had lots of spectacle that I really enjoyed, but it was at the expense of logic and good story-telling at many points.

Edited June 22, 2016 by Gertrude