S06.E10: The Winds of Winter

[stillshimpy]

In the world of Game of Thrones, the belief that blood ties make a person: That Starks are one way, always and reliably.  That Tullys are also known to have reliable traits, it wouldn't matter to Edmure the circumstances under which the child was conceived, it matters that the child has his blood.  It's a world where that means a great deal.   A lot of babies in that world are going to be conceived under really less than ideal circumstances, since marriages are made for alliances and not love.  

That's the only child Edmure is ever likely to have and he knows it.  Of course it makes him a bit softhearted to be moved by the plight of a baby he's never met, but it does make sense that Edmure cares specifically because his entire family was murdered at the Red Wedding: that's one of the few blood relatives that Edmure has remaining in the entire world.  That child dies and so does the Tully name, because Brynden wasn't married and wasn't making it out of Riverrun alive and Edmure had to know that his procreation prospects are permanently limited.  

Of course it makes him seem -- not weak or foolish -- but more emotionally vulnerable than the person to whom he was being held in direct contrast to, his uncle the Blackfish.  What made that moment somewhat infuriating is that Edmure was so weakened by a long imprisonment that he couldn't figure out the rather simple math: The Freys needed that kid as much as the Tullys did.  

Edmure in the books cares a lot about the people in his charge and it made sense to me that Edmure would care about the only child he was ever likely to have.  Worse still, the other part of that equation is that if that child is sacrificed, the Freys are going to need another heir to Riverrun, so unlike the Red Wedding Wedding Night, Edmure would be forced to participate in more heir-making sessions because they've got to have a Tully heir to hold Riverrun. 

[screamin]

9 minutes ago, stillshimpy said:

The Freys needed that kid as much as the Tullys did.

I don't know if that's so. In the books they were going to give Riverrun to Genna Frey's despised husband, IIRC - not to anyone with a Tully connection. So it seems like there's no particular leaning on their part to say that the heir to Riverrun must have Tully blood or a claim. I believe their claim to it lies in the Lannister throne having conquered it; as the Tully family had been treasonous, the Lannisters confiscated it and awarded it to their Frey vassals as reward for services rendered.

Which means that the Freys have no particular incentive to keep Edmure's baby alive - indeed, Genna's husband has every reason to want him dead. I thoroughly agree with you on Edmure's emotional stake in keeping the child alive, the only child he will have and the last of the Tullys.

Edited June 30, 2016 by screamin

[stillshimpy]

Oh God that's right, screamin, which unfortunately makes it even more likely they'd be fine with pitching a toddler to his doom.  I'd forgotten about the colossal wanker -- was it Emmon Frey? -- agitating around in the background, constantly mewling about how he was promised Riverrun. 

I still can't blame Edmure for having a sort of emotional attachment to his son, despite the circumstances.  Mary Queen of Scots (Mary Stuart) wrote to her son, James VI of Scotland, I of England for the remainder of her life quite lovingly despite the fact that she almost certainly participated in the  successful plot to have his father murdered and she was forced to abdicate in favor of James, when he was all of 13 months old and she never saw him again past that point.

People can care about children even when the circumstances of their birth and existence are otherwise entirely painful. 

That's no judgement against women who want nothing to do with a child conceived during a rape, by the way.  There's no universal truth to how someone might feel about a child otherwise surrounded by trauma and horror (hell, Darnley -- Mary's husband -- had her Italian Secretary murdered in front of her, it is believed, in hopes of causing a miscarriage -- James VI of Scotland, quite possibly the most beleaguered baby in English history).   

Someone might hate them and view that child as a constant reminder of horror or they might love that child in spite of all painful associations.  There are examples of both peppered throughout history.  Just saying, Edmure's reaction was not in the least outrageous.  

Edited June 30, 2016 by stillshimpy

[ElleMo]

5 hours ago, doram said:

*Which isn't even tactically logical - the Freys need that child to "legitimize" their claim on Riverrun. It makes no sense for them to threaten to kill it. The child would outlive Blackflish and his two years of siege. It just pretty much goes to show how ridiculous and idiotic the Edmure Tully character is. 

The Freys did not threaten the child, Jaime Lannister did.  Edmure had to have heard what was going on &  knew the Freys were idiot soldiers and that Jaime's men walked right into the camp.  So there is no reason that Edmure wouldn't believe that Jaime could get this child from the Freys, regardless of whether or not he had the Frey's permission.  It was pretty clear that Jaime didn't care if the Freys had a legitimate claim or not. He wanted Blackfish out and the Freys in so he could go back to KL

[Raachel2008]

The child is real? I thought Jamie was just fucking up with Edmure.

[piequinn35]

Well that was an awesome episode! 

I though the final scene will be the WW in front of the wall, I guess they are slower than Dany sailing to Westeros.

Haha to LF and Varys is a teleporter too! 

[ElleMo]

3 minutes ago, Raachel2008 said:

The child is real? I thought Jamie was just fucking up with Edmure.

That is a good question.  I was not clear on that.  

 

Does anyone know why blank quote boxes keeps popping up in my comment box?

Edited June 30, 2016 by ElleMo

[WearyTraveler]

On ‎28‎/‎06‎/‎2016 at 6:46 AM, jeansheridan said:

Why do people think Cersei is crazy?  I don't think she has had a break with reality at all.  She is paranoid in the books, but the show version has made her mostly rational.  Her hatred of Tyrion closed her mind to other potential killers of Joffrey, but being narrow minded isn't insane.  

Personally, I think mass murder is a sign that someone is not all there.  In our world we make the distinction between insane and legally insane; if I were judging Cersei's actions by our standards, I'd say she's a sociopath, but one legally sane to stand trial.

On ‎28‎/‎06‎/‎2016 at 1:51 PM, deedee said:

I know I am being dumb but can someone explain something to me. If magic prevents the White walkers from crossing the wall what is the big problem? They have moved the Wildlings (the ones that are left) to the safe side so who exactly is in danger? I must be missing something.

1) The knowledge as to the power of the Wall, and even its purpose has been lost.  Up until the first wights attacked Mormont, everyone in the Night's Watch thought that the Wall was there to protect the realm from Wildlings, when, in truth, it was erected with magic and physical might, to keep the WW at bay.  I don't think the men of the NW, much less the rest of the realm, even know that the Wall was built with magic spells to prevent the Walkers from coming through.  Actually, since Mormont was attacked south of the Wall (most likely because it was the men of the NW themselves who carried the bodies through - remember Sam had to go down to open the weirwood gate for Bran), they have no reason to think that the Walkers can't also come through.

2) Even if someone remembered, or found out about it (let's say Sam discovers some old book in that big ass library in the Citadel that explains it), the Wall has never been tested.  It was built after the Walkers were defeated by Azor Ahai the first time, so, no one knows if the magic is enough to hold them back.  And no one knows how many Walkers are coming or if they have gotten stronger with the centuries, or if the same magic that returned to the world and allowed Dany to hatch her dragons (or the magic the dragons brought when they hatched, if you believe that theory) has made the Walkers strong enough to bring the Wall down.

3) The Wall is not infallible, and the Wildlings know it.  On their march toward the Wall, they were desperately looking for the horn of Joramun, which is said to have the ability to bring the Wall down.  Most Wildlings think it's some grand horn hidden somewhere, some readers believe it could be the little horn Jon found with the dragonglass weapons, which he gave to Sam who is still carrying it around.  Whatever the case, the point still remains that there's magic that is believed to be strong enough to bring the Wall down, and there's a risk the Walkers could find and harness such magic.

19 hours ago, lmsweb said:

The reality though is come next season it's not really going to matter who is the nominal Head of House This or That. Nobody is going to give a flying fuck about following the line of succession to the nth degree. There are going to be dragons and undead zombies to worry about. At that point all anyone is going to care about is whether they live it through it or not, not whose name goes before whose on dinner invitations.

This.

Edited June 30, 2016 by WearyTraveler

[Helena Dax]

I never thought Sansa wanted Winterfell for her. To me, she was happy to see it in Jon's hands, just a bit worried about the KITN stuff.

Loved the episode, btw, it was a very powerful season finale. I'm glad Cersei killed all those sparrows or whatever, just sorry because the Tyrells died too. Loras and Margaery deserved better, sniff. And poor Tommen. No wonder he killed himself. How do you keep living after something like that? Someone said in another comment that he had become Cersei's least favourite child and I agree with that, although I think she was also resigned to lose him, sooner or later. 

The way Arya killed Walder Frey was deeply satisfying. Starks also pay their debts, heh.

I almost cried when Dany named Tyrion Hand of the Queen, it was a very touching moment for both of them. Also, I love that she's starting to adopt Westerosi customs. She's very good at that, btw.

[Gertrude]

Just saw another interview with Sophie that confuses me. There is so much she says that I just don't get from on screen. In private, she essentially gives Jon Winterfell, but then in the interview she doesn't trust him to trust her, and she distrusts Davos, who is Jon's advisor. She says she thinks Littlefinger would be a good ally, even if she doesn't trust him and he would have had her QitN. What? Where on screen does that come across? Sure, you could glean that from her looks, but you'd have to read a lot into it and you could also read other things into it, as we are all demonstrating. She even brings up the possibility others did - that she was copying Littlefinger's plan to let both armies (Bolton/Wildling) destroy each other and sweep in at the end. (she says not likely, but possible). Is Sansa ambitious or not? Does she trust Jon or not? Does she want to work with Littlefinger or not? Even after seeing how selfish he was and throwing her to Ramsey as a prize? Is she a wannabe player or not?

Then again, she does say that her smile after killing Ramsey should be a little troubling :p. I want to put stock in that, but since I don't trust what we see on screen for Sansa, I get why people might not think so.

[Hecate7]

8 hours ago, doram said:

What confuses me is the idea that Edmure would want / love / wish to protect this fictional son. He knew his Frey bride all of 3 hours and he was fucking her while his sister and nephew were being murdered by her family. Why the fuck would he give a damn about any child she might have conceived for him?

Because this is an honor-based society. Nobody loves their bride or their kids as a rule, but they've all sworn oaths. His honor is at stake. He must protect the wife and the child--otherwise the whole family unit, and by extension the dynasty, and by further extension the entire system of government and property ownership based on it, falls apart. A man's first obligation is to his father and his son--to his place in the chain of succession. His personal feelings are supposed to come second, if at all. That is why Jaime Lannister is so compelling. Here he is in an honor-based society, living by realpolitik and managing his love life completely outside the rules of his society.

[Hecate7]

On 6/29/2016 at 3:50 PM, slf said:

True. The show has killed people in a different way than they die in the books, and at different times too. Loras, IIRC, was feathered and had boiling oil dumped on him on Dragonstone, so he's not even in KL right now. It's unlikely he dies in KL of wildfire.

Feathered? I thought he was storming the castle at Dragonstone, and I also thought there was a scene of him in KL wrapped in bandages--nobody knowing if he'd live or die, or how awful he looked under the bandages. I had entertained hopes that that wasn't even him in there, or that he was just fine and lying there just waiting for a chance to kill Cersei.

[Macbeth]

http://www.salon.com/2016/06/28/sansa_stark_has_always_been_a_warrior_shes_been_fierce_all_along_and_it_kept_her_alive/

This is a very good, thoughtful article on Sansa.  I hope you enjoy.

Oh Arya.  When I saw Bronn drinking I was worried Arya had poisoned the wine.  If Arya had poisoned the wine - she would have killed a large number of people - and some would have been  innocent like Bronn.  She kept her killings to a minimum - but it is so disturbing on how she fed Walder his own children.  I agree with those who think the Frey pie was a bastardization of the book story.  I did like that Arya Killed Walder in the same way her mother was killed.

I don't have any titles for the Sept fire.  Just taglines.  God has left the building.  The sparrows have flown the coop.

I proclaim stillshimpy Queen of the boards.  I always like your posts stillshimpy.  They are always very thoughtful.

[lmsweb]

18 minutes ago, Macbeth said:

http://www.salon.com/2016/06/28/sansa_stark_has_always_been_a_warrior_shes_been_fierce_all_along_and_it_kept_her_alive/

This is a very good, thoughtful article on Sansa.  I hope you enjoy.

Oh Arya.  When I saw Bronn drinking I was worried Arya had poisoned the wine.  If Arya had poisoned the wine - she would have killed a large number of people - and some would have been  innocent like Bronn.  She kept her killings to a minimum - but it is so disturbing on how she fed Walder his own children.  I agree with those who think the Frey pie was a bastardization of the book story.  I did like that Arya Killed Walder in the same way her mother was killed.

I don't have any titles for the Sept fire.  Just taglines.  God has left the building.  The sparrows have flown the coop.

I proclaim stillshimpy Queen of the boards.  I always like your posts stillshimpy.  They are always very thoughtful.

Absolutely wonderful article. Thank you for posting it!

[Shanna Marie]

1 hour ago, Gertrude said:

In private, she essentially gives Jon Winterfell, but then in the interview she doesn't trust him to trust her, and she distrusts Davos, who is Jon's advisor. She says she thinks Littlefinger would be a good ally, even if she doesn't trust him and he would have had her QitN.

I think that interview has done a lot to muddy the waters. I'm pretty neutral on Sansa. I don't have really strong feelings in her favor (in the books, I found her most interesting when she was having to manage Robin), but I'm inclined to defend her because she gets the wrong end of the "Not Like Other Girls" trope and the fan hatred that tends to come with that. From what we saw on screen, I saw her fading smile when looking at Littlefinger as realizing that Jon had likely incurred Littlefinger's wrath and didn't have the skills to deal with it. But then the talk around that scene puts a spin on it that I still find hard to get from what's on the screen.

I could get her not telling Jon that the Vale army might be coming. I can even get her not telling him up front that the Vale army was even a possibility, if at that time she wanted to avoid being in Littlefinger's debt. What I don't get is the idea of her going into a snit about not being acknowledged in public. It doesn't seem like that was really a good time or place for Jon to deflect credit when they were rallying the forces for the next battle. It also could have raised questions like why they didn't mention that the Vale army was a possibility when they were going to the various Northern lords for support. Admitting that she hadn't told Jon about the Vale would have shown a division in the ranks and undermined him.

I can't see how Littlefinger could have done anything to make her Queen in the North. Even if she'd been acknowledged as Lady of Winterfell, I don't think there would have been any outcry to call her Queen in the North. They'd likely have left it as Lady of Winterfell, and there's a chance that they still would have called for Jon to be King in the North, since what they were looking for was a military leader. Being King in this situation isn't about wearing a crown and sitting at the high table at banquets. It's leading humanity's first line of defense against the horde of unstoppable ice zombies. Littlefinger doesn't yet have any sway over these people to have convinced them to give her any position. And if she even considers trusting the guy who sold her to a sadistic rapist in order to advance his own position and who murdered his wife so he could take over the lands controlled by her son, then she really is too stupid to live.

But I don't see that from what was on the screen. I find it hard to believe that Sansa would be that silly or petty or that she wants to be in any kind of spotlight after what she's been through. She probably does want Jon to listen to her more and take her more seriously, and she'd like the kind of credibility that Lady Mormont has, but I'd think that right now she's still getting her bearings.

[WatchrTina]

Quote

the Wall has never been tested.  It was built after the Walkers were defeated by Azor Ahai the first time, so, no one knows if the magic is enough to hold them back.  And no one knows how many Walkers are coming or if they have gotten stronger with the centuries, or if the same magic that returned to the world and allowed Dany to hatch her dragons (or the magic the dragons brought when they hatched, if you believe that theory) has made the Walkers strong enough to bring the Wall down.

I really really hope that one of the questions answered in the future is:  "Why now?"  The White Walkers have not been seen in an age.  When the series opened in Season 1, we (the viewers) saw one but no living man has seen one in centuries -- possibly thousands of years (except for that one member of the Night's Watch, who Ned executed.  Dragons are gone but they are remembered.  People know they once existed.  White Walkers have faded into myth.  So . . . why now?  The Night King appears to be the same "man" who Leaf turned into the first White Walker.  Where has he been for thousands of years  And why come back now? Enquiring minds want to know.

[slf]

2 hours ago, Hecate7 said:

Feathered? I thought he was storming the castle at Dragonstone, and I also thought there was a scene of him in KL wrapped in bandages--nobody knowing if he'd live or die, or how awful he looked under the bandages. I had entertained hopes that that wasn't even him in there, or that he was just fine and lying there just waiting for a chance to kill Cersei.

Oh, just shot up. He got hit by an arrow and a crossbow bolt, as well as hit by a mace and had boiling oil dumped on him. Reportedly. I don't recall the KL scene but I hope that it's true and that he's, like you suggest, not as gravely wounded. That's become a popular theory since historically any one of those wounds would kill most people. All of them combined...he should've died by the last injury. Either he's unbelievably strong and about to die a horrible death or he has a lot more cunning that I gave him credit for (even if someone else in the family came up with the plan).

[Colorful Mess]

I think D&D are deliberately muting public recognition of Sansa's contributions on purpose, to throw her into one last conflict, which will be a cold war over succession. In this interview Gillen (interpreting his character) sees significance in the hints LF has dropped about the rebellion. Gillen thinks it suggests that LF knows Jon isn't Ned's son (how he knows this I have no idea). This would fit with the line he says to her in the Godswood, "You, my love, are the future of House Stark." He seems to be pushing Sansa toward public power while he retains power over her in private. I'm sure he would love to have Jon's troops too... so maybe he's plotting to take over Winterfell and gain another piece on the board. 

[ParadoxLost]

3 hours ago, Gertrude said:

Just saw another interview with Sophie that confuses me. There is so much she says that I just don't get from on screen. In private, she essentially gives Jon Winterfell, but then in the interview she doesn't trust him to trust her, and she distrusts Davos, who is Jon's advisor. She says she thinks Littlefinger would be a good ally, even if she doesn't trust him and he would have had her QitN. What? Where on screen does that come across? Sure, you could glean that from her looks, but you'd have to read a lot into it and you could also read other things into it, as we are all demonstrating. She even brings up the possibility others did - that she was copying Littlefinger's plan to let both armies (Bolton/Wildling) destroy each other and sweep in at the end. (she says not likely, but possible). Is Sansa ambitious or not? Does she trust Jon or not? Does she want to work with Littlefinger or not? Even after seeing how selfish he was and throwing her to Ramsey as a prize? Is she a wannabe player or not?.

I don't think that this interview hints much at personal ambition to be QiTN or take the Iron Throne.  I think with both Jon and Davos that she sees them as too honorable.  She doesn't trust them to make the necessary political decisions or take the council of those like Sansa who have managed to survive several viper pits or consider the advice of any of the vipers like Littlefinger because their advice would be morally questionable. 

She has seen the power players up close and knows that honor can be a hindrance against the likes of Cersei and their remaining enemies.  She's worried it will lose them the North.  So if she turns on Jon, that is where it will come from.

She is jealous of Jon not because he was made KiTN but because no one recognizes what she sees as her strength and Jon's failing.  Jon was declared KiTN because he fought Ramsey even though he was all but assured to lose and die. But in doing, he also fell into the emotional traps that Sansa warned him about.  Sansa was ruthless and let Jon and his army bait the trap to win the day.  Jon got KiTN.  Sansa got 'maybe trust me next time' and she doesn't see any reason why she should because Jon didn't take her council about Bolton when she was right.  She was expecting a thanks for getting reinforcements, but bait in the trap is never going to say that even if they escaped the trap.

And I just realized that Sansa didn't just not tell Jon about the reinforcements.  She actually cold-bloodedly decided that Jon's death was a price she was willing to pay to end Bolton and take back Winterfell.

[screamin]

I expect Sophie Turner is talking through her ass about most things - there are plot points she's not supposed to reveal, so she's likely talking about anything but those plot points, and quite possibly at times saying things opposite what actually happen in an effort to obscure those plot points - kind of how the actor who plays Jon went around saying Jon was rilly rilly dead.

[Brn2bwild]

Just had a thought: how is Tyrion going to react to being in an alliance with the people who killed his niece?  Unlike the Tyrells and Joffrey, he would have little trouble figuring out that the Martells killed Myrcella. 

[slf]

3 hours ago, Colorful Mess said:

I think D&D are deliberately muting public recognition of Sansa's contributions on purpose, to throw her into one last conflict, which will be a cold war over succession. In this interview Gillen (interpreting his character) sees significance in the hints LF has dropped about the rebellion. Gillen thinks it suggests that LF knows Jon isn't Ned's son (how he knows this I have no idea). This would fit with the line he says to her in the Godswood, "You, my love, are the future of House Stark." He seems to be pushing Sansa toward public power while he retains power over her in private. I'm sure he would love to have Jon's troops too... so maybe he's plotting to take over Winterfell and gain another piece on the board. 

Well, in early season 5 Littlefinger tells Sansa about the tourney where Lyanna and Rhaegar met. Instead of saying, "I saw your aunt Lyanna, she was beautiful, blah blah blah" he specifically tells her:

"I saw her once. I was a boy, living with your mother's family. Lord Whent had a great tourney at Harrenhal. Everyone was there. The Mad King, your father, Robert Baratheon, and Lyanna. She was already promised to Robert. You can imagine what it was like for me, a boy from nowhere, with nothing to his name, watching these legendary men, tilting at the lists. The last two riders were Barristan Selmy and Rhaegar Targaryen. When Rhaegar won, everyone cheered for the prince. I remember the girls laughing when he took off his helmet and they saw that silver hair. How handsome he was. Until he rode right past his wife, Elia Martell, and all the smiles died. I've never seen so many people so quiet. He rode past his wife and he lay a crown of winter roses in Lyanna's lap. Blue as frost. How many tens of thousands had to die because Rhaegar chose your aunt? Yes, he chose her. And then he kidnapped her and raped her."

Especially how he chose to end that comment, stressing that there was sexual contact between Lyanna and Rhaegar which would be purely conjecture on his part but if he's given consideration to that over the years then it's not unreasonable that he might assume Jon was actually Rhaegar's son. So I think it's probable they've been writing Littlefinger as aware, or at least deeply suspicious of, Jon's parentage.

[Hecate7]

1 hour ago, slf said:

Well, in early season 5 Littlefinger tells Sansa about the tourney where Lyanna and Rhaegar met. Instead of saying, "I saw your aunt Lyanna, she was beautiful, blah blah blah" he specifically tells her:

"I saw her once. I was a boy, living with your mother's family. Lord Whent had a great tourney at Harrenhal. Everyone was there. The Mad King, your father, Robert Baratheon, and Lyanna. She was already promised to Robert. You can imagine what it was like for me, a boy from nowhere, with nothing to his name, watching these legendary men, tilting at the lists. The last two riders were Barristan Selmy and Rhaegar Targaryen. When Rhaegar won, everyone cheered for the prince. I remember the girls laughing when he took off his helmet and they saw that silver hair. How handsome he was. Until he rode right past his wife, Elia Martell, and all the smiles died. I've never seen so many people so quiet. He rode past his wife and he lay a crown of winter roses in Lyanna's lap. Blue as frost. How many tens of thousands had to die because Rhaegar chose your aunt? Yes, he chose her. And then he kidnapped her and raped her."

Especially how he chose to end that comment, stressing that there was sexual contact between Lyanna and Rhaegar which would be purely conjecture on his part but if he's given consideration to that over the years then it's not unreasonable that he might assume Jon was actually Rhaegar's son. So I think it's probable they've been writing Littlefinger as aware, or at least deeply suspicious of, Jon's parentage.

Except that he didn't say "and then he kidnapped her and raped her." Sansa did. She wasn't there, though, and so she really doesn't know. By her own admission Ned didn't talk about her. Littlefinger's final line is, "How many tens of thousands had to die because Rhaegar chose your aunt?" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hiQkGnfGHA

Edited July 1, 2016 by Hecate7

[WearyTraveler]

During the TOJ scene in the finale, we saw a woman was in the room with Lyanna, Ned and baby Jon.  I'm thinking the show might have her character come back in present time or have LF mention her.  She could have been the one to tell LF all about baby Jon.  He could have kept that knowledge to himself, preferring to have Cat thinking that Ned cheated on her and sitting on the information to use when it most suited him, if it ever suited him.

LF took pleasure in reminding everyone that Ned had a bastard, even Ned himself.  It is possible that he somehow knows.

[Oscirus]

It seems to me that if Littlefinger knew about Jon that he'd somehow use the information to manipulate a Robert v Ned war. He could only benefit from such a war.

[Macbeth]

1 hour ago, Oscirus said:

It seems to me that if Littlefinger knew about Jon that he'd somehow use the information to manipulate a Robert v Ned war. He could only benefit from such a war.

I agree. But I bet Varys, through his little birds, knows the truth.

[Enigma X]

2 hours ago, Macbeth said:

It seems to me that if Littlefinger knew about Jon that he'd somehow use the information to manipulate a Robert v Ned war. He could only benefit from such a war.

 

2 hours ago, Macbeth said:

I agree. But I bet Varys, through his little birds, knows the truth.

@OSCIRUS, sorry. I could not edit that first quote to attribute it to you.

 

I always had the impression, even before the show confirmation, that LF, Varys, and Oberon were well aware of the Lyanna and Rhaegar tryst was not a kidnapping through conversation they had with other people.

[stillshimpy]

Aw thanks, Macbeth, that's kind of you.  I respectfully decline so as not to be blown up, thoroughly perforated, stabbed in the back, gored by a boar , sold into marriage or knitted into a sweater and turned into a fetching pair  of boots (because y'all have to know that's going to happen to someone before this whole gig is up) .  But it was still a nice thing to say (unless you're hoping I end up as a pair of boots, that is), so thank you. 

LF took pleasure in reminding everyone that Ned had a bastard, even Ned himself.  It is possible that he somehow knows.

I think Littlefinger likely does know, although I'm not sure about Varys.  Varys might because he takes an interest in all thing Targaryen, but Littlefinger seems likely to know because he was obsessed with Cat and that alone would mean he'd take a very pointed interest in her eventual husband. 

But there's also something that Littlefinger said way back when, during The Infamous Sexposition Scene:  He said something about square-jawed, honorable Brandon (which is why book Brandon being a nearly complete shit came as a shock to me) ....but then Petyr went on to say that the little bother was even better and more honorable (this is not a direct quote and in gajillion years I am not going to rewatch "That's right, play with her ass!" scene in order to prove a point) ....and that's where his point ends. 

Littlefinger's point ends with how Ned is even more honorable and Dudley Dooright, but Ned's famous for being honorable, except for that whole "has a bastard son that he brought home to his wife" thing....and it occurs to me....wouldn't Littlefinger be the MOST likely person to rub that in his face and bring it up when no one else other than Auditioning Prostitutes Play Audience to His Exposition Fairy  are listening?  

[WearyTraveler]

I think LF would relish a Ned v. Robert War, but that wouldn't necessarily bring him closer to the throne.  Not until much later, when he had climbed up the ladder enough.  The thing is, I think TV LF knows, but book LF doesn't.

So, for the TV we have scenes with LF and Sansa in front of Lyanna's grave, and LF acts all coy about it, a scene that has twice popped up in the "previously on.." segment. That and other, albeit less conspicuous, anvils that have been dropped throughout lead me to believe that TV LF knows but has kept his trap shut.  And the show will explain it (or we will have to resort to fanwank it) as LF waiting for the right opportunity to make use of that information.  That is, a set of circumstances when such a revelation would bring the maximum benefit to Littlefinger, not just amuse him.

[Tikichick]

On 6/27/2016 at 2:33 PM, FemmyV said:

Yes! Everything from the tone, the music, and how much of it played out like Michael's settling of debts.

This episode left me wishing I haven't looked at so many spoilers. I knew it all was coming, the only surprise - if any - was the theatrics in how it played out.

KL: Cersei looked great in her military-themed dress, which pretty much screamed 'this girl is going to put up a fight.' Had to admire the way she enjoyed her wine and watched. Alas ... I'm going to miss Margaery, she was one of my faves. Marg was a great example of a female character who was totally at peace with her gender, understood its limitations, and adapted to just about every circumstance thrown at her, in her quest to be "THE" Queen. Gay husband? No problem. Sadist husband? Dealing with it. Boy husband? Well .. she made him a happy boy, at least. And she had the best of HS, too, it's just a shame he was too arrogant, in the end, to let her go when he finally realized where Marg's real priority was.

Tommen, we hardly knew ye. Ironic that, if Cersei hadn't felt the need to unleash the Mountain on Septa Unella, he might have remained with Tommen and prevented that. But that's why we still tolerate Cersie as a heavy, six years in: she always gets bitten in the ass by her schemes.

Dorne: Watching this scene made me go back to wondering WTF season 5 was even for. Was it really necessary to waste so much time, just to set up Myrcella's death? Was it really necessary to kill off Doran? Happy to see Highgarden and Dorne hookup against Cersei, but I just can't believe the awfulness we were subjected to, to get to this point.

Citadel: Nice to get a look at the library, but really, couldn't have Sam simply sent a raven? "Dearest Jon, Gilly and I ..." I normally enjoy Sam & Gilly, but this scene was soooo out of place in the episode.

The Twins: I enjoyed Jaime putting Walder in his place. At first I wondered if the serving girl was Arya but passed because: face. Lovely mirroring of Cersei's promise to Septa Unella (mine will be the last face you see before you die), a la Stark. But then again: when did Arya learn how to cook? "They're here, Sir." On edit: As fun as it was, I'm a little concerned about the Frey pies being given to Arya (instead of Manderly) to deliver. It may have been justice, but it was Cersei-style justice, not Mercy. I hope she finds Nymeria and Jon, fast.

North of the Wall: Finally, the Reveal! Sort of. We still don't know how Bran will interpret the info.

The North: I was very intrigued by the blocking of the Sansa / Jon scene on the battlements, and again, at the table. They are similar, they are apart. All thanks to the show’s writers for finally allowing Sansa to have an operating brain; she’s finally less of a stupid, selfish, bitch, and I can finally enjoy the character. Her relationship with LF is fascinating: she is learning she has power over him; she knows she shouldn't trust him; and yet, if he gets his heart's wish, he might offer her the greatest protection she could ask for, along with a more realistic version of the queenship she once wanted.

If Jon doesn't wind up marrying Dany or Arya, give Lyanna Mormont a few years, she's awesome, and probably, maybe has a wee crush on KotN. I'm sort of sorry to see Mel go. Yeah, she's an albatross, but an interesting one at that. She's far more useful, humbled, and Jon needs all the help he can get.  Davos was great in that scene, but Mel had a good point. Stannis and Selyse both gave the green light, and Davos himself knew there was a reason Stannis ordered him out of camp.

Dany & Co: At long last! On to Westeros we go. I still have some small fear that Daario may try to sell her out in the long run but I'm glad to see him becoming history — this actor was never really Daario Naharis to me, anyway. Love that Tyrion is Hand, once again.

Some things to Poi Dog Ponder:

Will someone release Edmure and if so, will he re-take Riverrun?

Is Bran going to bring the NK's mark south of the Wall?

What's going to happen when Tyrion and Olenna meet again? Will she clear his name in Joff's death?

When is someone going to tell Sansa the story about how LF held a knife to Ned Stark's throat, in the throne room?

Who will ally with Cersei? Is LF too far gone, in bringing the Vale knights to the North, to give the appearance of loyalty?

How will the Ironborn split affect things?

When is Jon going to give the order for all the North to start burning their dead?

Where is Robyn Arryn?

 

If Jaime turns on Cersei, there's another possibility, if Tyrion will rubber stamp it. I guess now is the time for the turning out of cousins we've not previously met.

I think the Stark daughter who needs to hear the story about Littlefinger holding the knife to Ned's throat in the throne room isn't Sansa. 

Most of the highborn houses have leagues of straggling cousins somewhere in the shadows who would be ready to assume the role of head of house/lord of the manner.

It's always surprised me the way Sam's story has been (mis)handled.  Now it's just going to feel rushed and way too contrived to deliver the payoff.

In all of the talk about marriage alliances no one ever considers whether the Night's King might take a moment in search of a bride on his journey south.  Wonder if anyone would request the DJ spin the Song of Ice and Fire at the reception so we could finally know what all the fuss is about?

[glowbug]

3 hours ago, WearyTraveler said:

I think LF would relish a Ned v. Robert War, but that wouldn't necessarily bring him closer to the throne.  Not until much later, when he had climbed up the ladder enough.  The thing is, I think TV LF knows, but book LF doesn't.

So, for the TV we have scenes with LF and Sansa in front of Lyanna's grave, and LF acts all coy about it, a scene that has twice popped up in the "previously on.." segment. That and other, albeit less conspicuous, anvils that have been dropped throughout lead me to believe that TV LF knows but has kept his trap shut.  And the show will explain it (or we will have to resort to fanwank it) as LF waiting for the right opportunity to make use of that information.  That is, a set of circumstances when such a revelation would bring the maximum benefit to Littlefinger, not just amuse him.

I agree. It seems that TV Littlefinger knows about Jon's true parentage but Book Littlefinger does not. There is absolutely no indication in the books Littlefinger knows about Jon. If he did I think there would have been some hints already. This may be a case of them combing characters again in a very small way (just transferring knowledge from one character to another). I suspect they don't want to bring in Howland Reed or Wylla or whoever to backup what Bran says so they're using Littlefinger. 

[Ambrosefolly]

They are getting pretty stingy with characters they want to bring in/not bring. Holland Reed already exists, we saw a younger version of him. Why would Littlefinger know this information? It is going to be convoluted isn't it?

[Tikichick]

On 6/27/2016 at 0:30 AM, Oscirus said:

Tying down a celibate woman and repeatedly raping her over time until Cersei says stop? That's very torturous plus I imagine that Cersei loves the power that she wields over that poor Septa for the rest of Septa's wretched life.

Not to mention the extremely brutal way he raped Elia Targaryen.

[Tikichick]

38 minutes ago, glowbug said:

I agree. It seems that TV Littlefinger knows about Jon's true parentage but Book Littlefinger does not. There is absolutely no indication in the books Littlefinger knows about Jon. If he did I think there would have been some hints already. This may be a case of them combing characters again in a very small way (just transferring knowledge from one character to another). I suspect they don't want to bring in Howland Reed or Wylla or whoever to backup what Bran says so they're using Littlefinger. 

As far as the books go I thought I remembered Littlefinger mentioning Wylla's name in a conversation he had with someone, cannot remember who.  Made me wonder if he had spirited her off somewhere.

[mac123x]

20 minutes ago, Tikichick said:

As far as the books go I thought I remembered Littlefinger mentioning Wylla's name in a conversation he had with someone, cannot remember who.  Made me wonder if he had spirited her off somewhere.

I think one of his "smallfolk" back at his family home in the Fingers is named Wylla, the one who has a new bastard kid every few years.  Might be the same woman, but more likely its just GRRM's propensity to reuse names.

[WearyTraveler]

1 hour ago, Ambrosefolly said:

They are getting pretty stingy with characters they want to bring in/not bring. Holland Reed already exists, we saw a younger version of him. Why would Littlefinger know this information? It is going to be convoluted isn't it?

Not necessarily.  We saw that woman in the room with Ned, Lyanna and baby Jon (the show might call her Wylla, or not; so far she's unnamed).  She could have met LF later in life and told him.

[Ambrosefolly]

2 minutes ago, WearyTraveler said:

Not necessarily.  We saw that woman in the room with Ned, Lyanna and baby Jon (the show might call her Wylla, or not; so far she's unnamed).  She could have met LF later in life and told him.

For something super secret that could have easily wiped out the Starks, why would this chick, who seems completely unrelated to Littlefinger, tell a stranger something that important. I think Bran could be enough. I don't see the need to involve Littlefinger.

Edited July 1, 2016 by Ambrosefolly

[Hecate7]

9 hours ago, Oscirus said:

It seems to me that if Littlefinger knew about Jon that he'd somehow use the information to manipulate a Robert v Ned war. He could only benefit from such a war.

But that's exactly what he's been doing! It's just that Robert died before Littlefinger had gained the kind of position he needed for such a war to directly benefit him. But he's been moving pieces into position patiently this whole time.

[WearyTraveler]

2 minutes ago, Ambrosefolly said:

For something super secret that could have easily wiped out the Starks, why would this chick, who seems completely unrelated to Littlefinger, tell a stranger something that important. I think Bran could be enough. I don't see the need to involve Littlefinger.

To be clear, I don't want them to involve LF.  I just think that the way the actor has played the scenes concerning Lyanna has been coy, and I take into account that every time there was a TOJ flashback this season, they felt the need to remind us of LF and Sansa's scene in the crypt.  For TV, those things are kind of anvils falling from the sky.  And it wouldn't be the first time the show cut corners (see Tyrion telling Dany that Jaimie told him about the wildfire).

So, while I'm hoping that it's all misdirection and AG has been playing LF coy because LF is always supposed to look like he knows more than he's letting on, I wouldn't be surprised if LF is one of the people who knows and can confirm Jon's parentage on the show.

[Umbelina]

Aside from everything else, it's simple logic that Ned's bastard could be Lyanna and Rhaegar's son.  Everyone knew he "abducted" her.  Everyone knew he was infatuated with her because he gave her the roses at the tournament, which caused dead silence as his by-passed wife simply sat there.  It's very possible Littlefinger had spies feeding him information, because that's not something Littlefinger would ignore as a possible useful tool.  Littlefinger had plenty of reasons to be very interested in all of those developments, especially after the woman he loved was betrothed to Ned.

I am not as sure that he knows for sure, but I think he very much suspects.

ETA

Everyone also knew that Robert was busy killing all heirs babies or not, so Ned, "honorable" Ned, had plenty of reason to sully his honor to protect his sister's child.  Littlefinger, who studies people and understands them, could have simply put two and two together.

ETA again.

Everyone knew that Ned killed Ser Arthur Dayne, who was Rhaegar's man.  http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Eddard_Stark

Frankly, I'm only shocked that more people didn't figure it out.

Edited July 1, 2016 by Umbelina

[DigitalCount]

Ever since the conversation with Sansa, I've thought Baelish knew because he figured it out, not because he just happened to know like all the other suggestions (Reed, Wylla, etc.). Varys probably could figure out the truth. He didn't need to witness it, he's just intelligent. 

[Shanna Marie]

36 minutes ago, Umbelina said:

Littlefinger, who studies people and understands them, could have simply put two and two together.

That's what I figure, if he does know, it's not like he has hard evidence like a witness or a paternity test. He just did the math -- Rhaegar was into Lyanna and "kidnapped" her, and nine months later, super-honorable Ned Stark suddenly has a bastard kid. Though I'm not sure what good the knowledge would have done Littlefinger until now, and if he doesn't have evidence, it's only good for stirring up rumors. Now, it might be a way to try to bring down Jon as King in the North, or it might start some side squabble that he could use as a diversion.

[Raachel2008]

3 hours ago, Ambrosefolly said:

They are getting pretty stingy with characters they want to bring in/not bring. Holland Reed already exists, we saw a younger version of him. Why would Littlefinger know this information? It is going to be convoluted isn't it?

Absolutely. Those who know know Jon is not Ned's are those who were there: Ned, Holland Reed and that midwife, plus Bran. it remains to bee seen if Bran learned that Rhaegar is the father, of this is the stuff for a future vision. If D&D pay attention to what people say, they  will have a flashback or Bran having another vision;  while we all know he is Rhaegar's son, people who haven't read the books or are not as involved in the show are either confusing about who is his father or think it is Robert. My money is a 100% in one of those two things happening (Bran's vision or flashback, though they are the same).

I agree that Oberyn may have known about Rhaegar/Lyanna (Rhaegar chosing Lyanna in the tournament was huge), but I'm not sure if he would know about Jon. Littlefinger and Varys probably put 2 and 2 together that there was as bastard, but what? See, the thing is that Ned never faltered. He spent Jon's entire life saying he was his son. He didn't tell Catelyn, was seen as cheater, watched Catelyn mistreat Jon. The only reason I think Ned didn't legitimize Jon as Stark/heir, ensuring there would never be room  for doubts about his paternity and making Jon even safer his because if something happened to Robb, Jon would trump Bran and Rickon in the sucession line. But it is such a sure thing, that Jon is a Stark, that nobody doubts that, thus the North making him King in The North. Ned made sure  there were no doubts, and it helps a lot that Jon is all Stark stoic, just like Ned.

I still think that it doesn't matter if anyone says Jon is a Targaryen, if it cannot be proven. Hello Jon riding Drogon, patting Viserys on the head, or commanding 'Dracarys' to Rhaegal. 

6 hours ago, Tikichick said:

I think the Stark daughter who needs to hear the story about Littlefinger holding the knife to Ned's throat in the throne room isn't Sansa. 

Nah, if one of the surviving Starks is going to kill Littlefinger, it is Sansa, not Arya, not Jon, not Bran. Though, I would rather see Littlefinger die in the most non-special way, Sansa not even bothering to kill him herself, but telling a low rank soldier 'just kill him', in the most disdainful 'you are not that pretty or special and I' won't waste my time with you' way.

I hope Arya is done with the killing, and starts heading North, where she can help Jon and Sansa with the White Walkers. I know her list is still quite long, but thinking about those 13-15 episodes ahead and plot development for all the characters, it makes no sense if Arya check all the names left in her list.

Cersei - Cersei is  going to be killed by Jamies or Tyrion (my money is on Jamie). Even if D&D never bring the Valonqr profecy, Arya killing Cersei is more of the same. Jamie killing Cersei is something that would surprise the 'normal viewer', break their unhealthy co-dependency and 'free' Jamie to die like the soldier he is fighting against the White Walkers.

The Mountain -  I think the Hound is going to kill the Mountain, and this will be enough for Arya, since she told the Waif that she no longer wanted to kill the  Hound.  If the  Hound doesn't kill the Mountain, maaaaaybe he goes with Arya to Winterfell, though I'm not really sure. 

Melisandre - Not going to be killed by Arya because her magic is needed agaisnt the White Walkers. Carice van Houten is expecting her first child this fall, IIRC, I'm not expecting to see Melisandra around that much in the first episodes of season 7. 

Iyn Payne - Anyone could kill him, Arya cannot be the only daughter/family member who hates him. Also, why would she go back to King's Landing? She told Jaqen she was going North and she is going North. She just killed Walder Frey at The Twins, why would she turn South? 

Thoros and Beric - It is pretty obvious that Arya and the Brotherhood will cross paths, though I'm not convinced she will kill them. And if she does, she better call Thoros first, so he cannot revive Beric. Maybe Brienne joins them, and things get really interesting.

Arya's journey has the be more than about becoming a killer machine, really.

Edited July 1, 2016 by Raachel2008

[slf]

14 hours ago, Hecate7 said:

Except that he didn't say "and then he kidnapped her and raped her." Sansa did. She wasn't there, though, and so she really doesn't know. By her own admission Ned didn't talk about her. Littlefinger's final line is, "How many tens of thousands had to die because Rhaegar chose your aunt?" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hiQkGnfGHA

Good catch; serves me right for refreshing my memory with a transcript instead of video. 

I do think they've hinted that LF "knows", or at least they've set it up ambiguously enough that they could go either way depending on what they want. It's pretty interesting, though, because you'd think of everyone Littlefinger would most want to believe the honorable Ned Stark had stepped out on his new wife with a servant and fathered a bastard son. Yet he seems to have at least entertained the idea that Ned was actually a loyal husband who shouldered blame for something he didn't do to protect his beloved sister and her son, and in doing so pulled of one of the great cons of their time.

[screamin]

2 hours ago, Umbelina said:

It's very possible Littlefinger had spies feeding him information, because that's not something Littlefinger would ignore as a possible useful tool.  Littlefinger had plenty of reasons to be very interested in all of those developments, especially after the woman he loved was betrothed to Ned.

Wasn't LF a teenager then, with no power at all?

[Umbelina]

Well, considering they are ALL teenagers in the books, I don't think age has all that much to do with anything.

[screamin]

I mean, he was an even younger teenager than the others (like, fourteen?) with low rank and no money or power of his own yet, so I can't imagine him having yet managed to amass a network of spies to feed him information at Harrenhal, which wasn't where he lived...

[dizzyd]

I've watched the finale 6 times now and each time enjoyed it tremendously, still awed by the high caliber of the production and how almost every character besides Jorah, Brienne, the Hound and Ghost were covered. The next 10 months are going to be awefully long and I'm going to feel a huge emptiness after S7 that I doubt will be easily filled by another show.

In all 6 viewings, I did not conclude that Lyanna told Ned her sons name and that it was something other than Jon, so I'm not sure why others think that's what was muted. I simply thought she told him he's Rhaegar's son and that Robert would kill him if he found out. She probably did name him after that vision ended and before she died and I think she named him Jon. Btw, where was Robert during her entire pregnancy, it didn't take 9 months to usurp the throne, did it? 

Since S1 I have always wondered if the end game would be anyone winning the throne or if it ended up as a relic in a ruin of the throne room like in the House of B and W vision, as in fire and ice will just cancel each other out and the whole game was for nought. 

[TaurusRose]

On 6/30/2016 at 1:28 AM, Gertrude said:

D&D did her a disservice and Sansa fans are (IMO) rightly upset. It comes down to sloppy storytelling and really dropping the ball on Sansa's characterization. I did not see any of the Boss Ass Bitch Sophie talked about preseason, with the exception of her speech to Ramsey before he died. She was strong in that moment, but otherwise she's confusing, contradictory and a bit of a sulky brat. I don't think it's too much to ask that Sansa demonstrate that she's grown the fuck up and learned how to take control of her destiny, especially in a season so heavily populated with strong women doing just that. The writing for her sucked.I think this is the point people are arguing. The way it was written, it could have been interpreted as Jon usurping Sansa. A simple statement of public support from Sansa would have erased this whole line of argument and made much more sense. Not only that, but it would have shown Sansa as more powerful and in control of herself than just being insulted and swept aside.

I agree that the writing for Sansa has been confusing and Sophie Turner's direction has not helped.   After watching TWoW several times, because I LOVE Jon being hailed KitN, I've decided that Sansa comes across as mostly rather melancholy.  I honestly don't think Sansa begrudges Jon anything. Neither of them have ever been grasping people, drunk with ambition like Littlefinger or Cersei.  But where I can get always get a good read on Jon's character, this new version of Sansa is puzzling. At first she came across as a spoiled highborn girl, but now she's almost a female version of Theon...unsure of everything, especially herself.  She hasn't healed from the abuse she suffered at Ramsay's hands, she's lost another sibling, and to top it all off, she still has a dangerous viper circling her.  As for destiny, especially the way the story has unfolded up to now, Sansa doesn't appear to have ever been slated for any great role; whereas Jon's destiny has been foreshadowed from the moment he reached Castle Black.  That said, Sansa's growth and power doesn't have to come from ruling, she can become an influential and respected person as the Lady of Winterfell.    

On 6/30/2016 at 2:35 AM, slf said:

Regarding Jon's screwups...? Just recently, charging the front lines by himself and choosing to spend the battle as a foot soldier, and so didn't issue a single command from the field. For a guy being touted as a great military leader those actually are screwups; you command from the back or you do what Robb did and keep a small guard around yourself whom you could dispatch with orders. He refused to listen to reason when discussing with Sansa and Davos how many soldiers he had to fight with; Sansa wanted to send for reinforcements from House Cerwyn (an excellent suggestion as they are incredibly loyal and only a half day's ride from Winterfell) but Jon got stubborn: "we fight with the army we have." The losses his army suffered were partially Sansa's fault (for not disclosing the Vale army's impending arrival; or the one she was hoping for anyway) but it was just as much Jon's fault for refusing to look into getting more men.

As to this next point I just want to restate that Jon's NW brothers should not have killed him. Absolutely. But that they did and that he didn't even see it coming...like...that was not a spontaneous assassination. Even the show, which has given Jon a few victories he hasn't earned, knows it: "I failed." 

Pretty much, dude. Hardhome should never have happened in the first place, and really highlighted Jon's blind spots especially w/r/t his humanism. Taking men away from the Wall (their force multiplier) to get the wildlings was a terrible idea, if entirely understandable and even heroic; he doesn't want to just let innocent people die if there's the possibility he might save them. (However, he cut that deal with Tormund since that was the only way Tormund would agree to get men together for Stannis to retake Winterfell. So: not entirely selfless.) There's also some logic to it: those wildlings would have been killed and turned into WW (though I doubt their numbers would have made a difference, ultimately). I get all of that and sympathize with it. However, the Wall exists for a reason and that is to defend the realms from attack and the WW. The Wall was already undermanned, had already taken a beating- they could not afford to have their forces cut and sent on a rescue mission to bring in hundreds or thousands of slow-moving men, women, and children, many of whom would've been starving, sick, or injured. As awful as it is, it was neither his call to make or his deal to strike. He needed to preserve his forces to defend the Wall; that was his job as Lord Commander: to hold the Wall.

Once he had made the choice to go through with it it was his job to manage his men. The argument he gave the wildlings is the one he should've given to the Night's Watch: “We’re not friends. We’ve never been friends. We won’t become friends today… This isn’t about friendship. This is about survival. This is about putting a 700 foot wall between you and what’s out there… These aren’t normal times. The White Walkers don’t care if a man’s Free Folk or Crow. We’re all meat for their army.” Because there's a lot of bad blood there (like Olly (??) watching his parents getting eaten by wildlings) and they are not only being expected to work with the wildlings but to allow the wildlings into the very lands that they have been defending from attack. I don't envy Jon the responsibility of beginning reconciliation but, shit. That was his responsibility.

It was just the wrong choice, and it followed other wrong choices like getting involved in politics south of the Wall, another huge no-no for the Watch. For a reason. It's not his job to gather men to help Stannis attack the Boltons and retake Winterfell. It's actually his job to not do that.

I don't think Jon's an idiot, don't get me wrong. He's one of a handful of characters I've really liked in the books and on the show and while I'm super annoyed about the season finale it doesn't change my love for the character. But the NW - while a vital learning experience for him - was not his place and he just couldn't be as objective as he needed to be. He made some serious missteps as a leader and on the battle field.

Jon's leadership has always been second guessed by this one or the other, but I don't see any of his victories as unearned and I don't know what you mean by even the show knows it.  Jon successfully infiltrated the wildling camp, learned what they were planning, then escaped to report back to the NW.  He held off the attack of the wildling army at the wall when Alliser Thorne was wounded.  Before that he lead the attack on Craster's Keep, avenging LC Mormont.  No one denies that Jon lost his head during the battle of the bastards.  That doesn't mean he is not a strong military commander or leader of men, and once Jon's horse was shot out from under him, he didn't have any choice but be a foot soldier. Everything you pointed out about this particular battle, Jon knew the moment he charged, but his heart couldn't go along with his head once he saw his brother go down.  Was it bad for the team?  Well, yeah.  But totally understandable under the circumstances.  Jon is brave and loyal; he's courageous with a huge heart and that is why people follow him.  Davos didn't oppose Jon's plan and as far as we know, Cerwyn was approached off screen.  When Lady Mormont called out the houses, Cerwyn was on her list.  If he hadn't refused the call, he should have spoken up and cleared his name, but he didn't.  As a matter of fact, he didn't pledge an oath to Jon at all, and didn't take part in the cheering until it was clear the other lords were all in.  So, once again, the only thing we know for sure is that Sansa reached out to LF and kept secrets from Jon.  The end.  

I think you're confusing things regarding Hardhome and the events leading up to it.  Jon did not strike any bargains with Stannis (i.e. negotiating with Tormund and the wildlings so that Stannis could take Winterfell).  Jon refused all of Stannis's overtures including giving him the name Stark and the title of Warden of the North.  Jon stayed true to the oath he'd taken to Night's Watch.  Jon sought a pact with the wildlings to help the brothers fight off the White Walkers.  He did everything he could to increase the numbers of the NW...he sent letters to all the houses in the North requesting men; he even sent a letter to Roose Bolton; although he hated doing it.  Jon put his case before Tormund who grudgingly agreed, but only if Jon went with him to Hardhome to help persuade the free folk.  Prior to doing this, Jon sought the advice of Maester Aemon.  He was concerned because he knew his plan would divide the brothers bitterly, half would hate him as soon as he gave the order.  Aemon told Jon that half the men hated him already. "You will find little joy in your command," Aemon said, "but with luck you will find the strength to do what needs to be done.  Kill the boy, Jon Snow. Winter is almost upon us.  Kill the boy and let the man be born."  It was certainly Jon's call as Lord Commander to make the decision he thought best to protect the wall and everyone south of it.  Because the game was over if those fuckers got through.  

Jon advised the NW of his plan and as expected, they voiced their disapproval; especially Alliser Thorne who resented Jon from the beginning and never more than when Jon was elected Lord Commander over him.  Jon reminded them of the greater enemy, but still they clung to the grievances of the past; proving that you cannot reason with people who don't want to be reasoned with despite the eventual harm that will land on all.  The one mistake I think Jon made was not sending Alliser to another part of the wall because he was the real instigator.  Instead, Jon made him First Ranger and put Thorne in command when he left for Hardhome.  I have no doubt that Alliser used the opportunity to fan the flames already stirring against Jon in his absence.  I know the failings of humankind; the inability to see past old hurts, wars and injustices, the ability to be supremely selfish and to hold grudges for eons.  But I don't understand "biting off your nose to spite your face."  Alliser and his cronies knew about wights and White Walkers and had seen evidence of them with their own eyes.  What insanity made them think an army of dead wildlings turned wights was better than tolerating them as allies to help fight the real threat? What made them think that the oath, "I am the sword in the darkness, the watcher on the walls, the shield that guards the realms of men" didn't refer to something bigger than wildlings?  When Jon presented his argument to the free folk, quite a few of them took him up on the offer.  They wanted to survive and live.  In this, they were far more reasonable than the men of the watch.  

And lastly, the wall has always been under-manned; Jon did not leave it any more so when he went to Hardhome.  The wall wasn't under any threat when he left, and only a handful of brothers accompanied Jon and Tormund.  Hardhome took the hit from the Night King's army, lots of free folk died and were turned during that battle. So, I disagree wholeheartedly with your reasoning.  Jon was not Stannis's pawn. Jon did not involve himself in the politics south of the wall, and Jon did not make the wrong choice.  He knew certain factions were unhappy with his decision, but he never thought they would murder him. The wrong choice was made by Alliser, Olly and the rest.  Bet they were shocked to shit when they saw that even death couldn't keep Jon Snow down.  

Edited July 8, 2016 by taurusrose
Clarification of a few points

[Hecate7]

7 hours ago, Raachel2008 said:

I hope Arya is done with the killing, and starts heading North, where she can help Jon and Sansa with the White Walkers. I know her list is still quite long, but thinking about those 13-15 episodes ahead and plot development for all the characters, it makes no sense if Arya check all the names left in her list.

Cersei - Cersei is  going to be killed by Jamies or Tyrion (my money is on Jamie). Even if D&D never bring the Valonqr profecy, Arya killing Cersei is more of the same. Jamie killing Cersei is something that would surprise the 'normal viewer', break their unhealthy co-dependency and 'free' Jamie to die like the soldier he is fighting against the White Walkers.

The Mountain -  I think the Hound is going to kill the Mountain, and this will be enough for Arya, since she told the Waif that she no longer wanted to kill the  Hound.  If the  Hound doesn't kill the Mountain, maaaaaybe he goes with Arya to Winterfell, though I'm not really sure. 

Melisandre - Not going to be killed by Arya because her magic is needed agaisnt the White Walkers. Carice van Houten is expecting her first child this fall, IIRC, I'm not expecting to see Melisandra around that much in the first episodes of season 7. 

Iyn Payne - Anyone could kill him, Arya cannot be the only daughter/family member who hates him. Also, why would she go back to King's Landing? She told Jaqen she was going North and she is going North. She just killed Walder Frey at The Twins, why would she turn South? 

Thoros and Beric - It is pretty obvious that Arya and the Brotherhood will cross paths, though I'm not convinced she will kill them. And if she does, she better call Thoros first, so he cannot revive Beric. Maybe Brienne joins them, and things get really interesting.

Arya's journey has the be more than about becoming a killer machine, really.

 

Agree that Littlefinger is Sansa's, but unsure about Cersei anymore--Jaime, Tyrion, or Sandor is my bet. Also that The Mountain is the Hound's to kill, but we've seen how Oberyn fared against him--it'll have to be someone VERY hard to kill, someone who can fight either too close or too far away, and too fast, for the Mountain to hit. The story likes to deprive its characters of their expected vengeance, as in the case of Oberyn.

Disagree on Melisandre. This story doesn't preserve the easiest ways to solve problems. Just when we're thinking how handy it is that Jaime could be traded for Ned, or that Cleganebowl will take down Cersei, some completely unexpected thing happens instead. Usually the worst thing that could happen to the characters is what happens. Arya is an assassin, not a combat soldier. She's good at sneaking in and eliminating a target, and she might be an adequate archer or bandage roller, but her use to the family is more as an assassin. Melisandre on the show will most likely be killed by Arya. In the books, this is probably also her fate. There are other red priests and priestesses, and there are dragons coming. Melisandre can be sacrificed.

Just anybody could NOT kill Ilyn Payne, and certainly not anyone in the Stark family. Sansa won't--she's not going to cross his path. Bran can't, Rickon probably won't meet him, and Jon Snow has his hands full with other things. Ilyn Payne is such a good swordsman that Jaime Lannister respects his abilities, so unless Sansa poisons him (unlikely), it'll be Arya. He is formidable, and a sort of boss level swordfighting opponent for Arya. Brienne could kill him but at present has no reason to, The Hound is unlikely to have a reason, and so Arya is probably the one who'll do the job.