S07.E01: Dragonstone

[Oscirus]

24 minutes ago, GrailKing said:

She does, but not in his way of thinking, hers is more control over her life, and Winterfell maybe, Queen no; family and safety yes.

I wonder. The fact that she's emulating Cersei's style as opposed to a more northern style hints that she might very well want to be queen. Maybe  not now because it's  impossible  at the moment, but, if LF shows her a feasible way, I could see her being on board.

[arjumand]

19 hours ago, Gertrude said:

What even grates more is that Sam already knew this information. Stannis told him at Castle Black and no one ever pumped him for info or acted on it. In this episode Sam even says that Stannis mentioned it.

This, along with Archmaester Jim Broadbent's words makes me even more suspicious of the whole Sam plot, and why it's there.

As you say, Sam already knew about the dragonglass at Dragonstone - and he says that Stannis told him; and that's the only thing he finds out after weeks or months at the Citadel? That's highly suspicious to me.

Secondly, we hear that he's talked to everyone who would listen, and plenty who wouldn't, about the Night King, and the White Walkers - no-one believes him. But the Archmaester does - except he also doesn't care. At the end of his speech to Sam, he adds the stuff about the Wall being protection enough, almost as an afterthought. But the real weight in his words is before that - he mentions so many disasters, says that 'we thought they were the end of everything, but they weren't'. But these events were disastrous for many: even something relatively minor (compared to the other events he mentions) like Robert Baratheon's death resulted in the displacement of populations, the destruction of the state religion (one of the things which struck me in the books was the many stories of septs being desecrated, septons and septas tortured and killed) and the breaking of the social contract.

The gist seems to be that as long as the Maesters have everything written down, it doesn't matter what happens to the rest of Westeros.

Also, let's say the only solution against the White Walkers is magic, and dragons - but in the books we have the Grand Maester conspiracy to wipe out magic, and dragons, so Sam is in exactly the wrong place to get any help against the Night King.

In fact, the only useful, new thing Sam learned that there is a 'Dragon Queen' headed towards Westeros.

Now this could be contradicted anywhere down the line, but I'm starting to see Sam being similar to books Brienne - going in circles, marking time, not achieving anything of what he's planned. I mean, sure, cleaning up feces and helping with autopsies is probably fine for entry-level trainee Maesters, but not what he came to Oldtown for.

[FemmyV]

11 hours ago, OhOkayWhat said:

I felt some parallels between the Hound and Arya. The show even included the farmer and daughter they met.

I'm looking forward to their reunion, also the Hound + Sansa's reunion. Not necessarily a SanSan shipper, but I can accept there's something going on under the hood.

[Macbeth]

4 hours ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

Won't the women who Arya left alive tend to the dead and bury them?  It's not like the Twins is now completely deserted but for dead bodies.  And if they are buried, the Night Prince may not be able to find them.

There is a reason that Jon is insisting on burning not burying the bodies.  I believe the Night Prince is raising the bodies from the graves.

[FnkyChkn34]

43 minutes ago, tangerine95 said:

I can get why Sansa wouldn't be exactly happy.She is home and they got rid of the Boltons but Cersei is still a threat and they just lost Rickon on top of all the previous loss and trauma.Just coming home as much as she wanted it probably isn't enough at least right away and she clearly doesn't feel safe yet.I think they're trying to do a fake out like Sansa wants to be queen and resents Jon and that's why she argues with him but I don't think that's her true motivation,they're just playing it up for drama right now.

I agree with the last part.  I think Sansa is salty because (for all she knows) Robb, Bran, and Rickon are dead, yet her bastard brother is running *her* castle.

[Conan Troutman]

41 minutes ago, britesongs said:

Technically, Castle Black is south of the Wall and way back in S1, they brought back the bodies of a couple (I think?) of Benjen's scouting party and the wights reanimated and attacked Jon and Lord Mormont. 

Now, I don't think any dead person will automatically become a wight (the WW have to be directly involved, I think), but to me, that's proof that their power does indeed work south of the Wall.

We don't know if they were actually reanimated beyond the Wall - I always thought they were like programmed sleepers, reanimated before and then simply pretending to be dead. 

[KungFuBunny]

23 hours ago, Raachel2008 said:

Who says Robin has to chose? LF could trip on the steps of one of those stairs in Winterfell or meet a boar somewhere, no need to have him around. He killed Lysa, he put Sansa into Ramsay's bed, there is more than enough to justify an 'accident'. Robin is a Tully and the son of Jon Arryn, his loyalty is to the Starks, his cousins. If LF died, do you think he would just withdraw his troops? I don't.

Exactly. Don't announce it just arrange for Littlefinger to die.

Enter Sansa with a little flirty flirt with pervy cousin Robyn. Convince him to leave the majority of his army with them and he goes home to the Vale.

Set him up with a pile of things to make fly through the Moon Door and everyone is a happy camper

[Blonde Gator]

47 minutes ago, Oscirus said:

You oversimplify running a castle by a lot. Bran had advisers and people left in place to assist him, Arya has her intelligence.  Not even close to the same thing. 

And Walder Frey DOESN'T have all of those same people to "assist" him?  You can bet that all of those positions are not filled by Frey-spawn, they are lowly positions.  I am throwing the BS card.

Edited July 18, 2017 by Blonde Gator

[KaleyFirefly]

9 hours ago, ae2 said:

Oh, and I'd love to find a blog or a podcast that focuses primarily on comparing specific episodes of the show to the book, and analyzes the impact it might have on the story. I've done some searching and have yet to find one that goes into this in much depth.

I long ago decided (after reading the first 4 books), that at this point I only want to watch the show. I might finish reading the books, but ONLY if -- and this is a big if -- GRRM actually completes the entire series. Many of the plots are very different in the books than in the show, and there are about a million more plot threads in the books. So I only want to get back into those plots if I know that GRRM has wrapped them all up. As far as anyone knows, he may never finish the books. He's been promising "Winds of Winter" for years now. Maybe he has lost interest in writing them now that the show has already shown many of the plots much further along.

[TaurusRose]

1 hour ago, Blonde Gator said:

I'm confused about why there's such a focus on "two weeks", or the running of a castle.  Frey said "two feasts within a fortnight" in Arya's little speech (presuming he was made dead on the night of the first feast).  Walder could have taken to his sick bed, and tell his servants "NO VISITORS".  Meanwhile, Arya is running around as the servant girl setting things up.  It doesn't matter, really, there are a million ways to account for any time gap between Senior Frey and the Frey-spawn's deaths.   We're talking about magical abilities w/faceless men, and many others in this show.  Personally, I'm far more bothered by Baelish & Varys's Star Trek transporter than tiny plot holes. 

None of this crap bothers me.  It's a show with fucking dragons, giants and white walkers.  It's fantasy!  I'm just rolling with it.

[Tikichick]

1 hour ago, GrailKing said:

What will make her happy, LF head on a spike, she hasn't forgiven him for Ramsey, or Dontos, or framing her and Tyrion, she's yet to find out his biggest betrayal, when that comes ( and it will ) he's dead.

I believe that it will end with LF loosing his composure once he realizes Sansa isn't dancing on the end of his string anymore and he lashes out with his long-held fury and frustration with Ned and Catelyn -- and Sansa as proxy, to taunt her with his role in Ned's downfall.  (Poetically I expect LF to suffer his own "downfall".)

ETA  Incidentally, I was immediately drawn to the fact that the two traitorous houses at issue between Jon and Sansa are now in the hands of their heirs, Ned and (red haired) Alys.  That was too on the nose to be inconsequential.

Edited July 18, 2017 by Tikichick
Forgotten detail

[Blonde Gator]

8 minutes ago, taurusrose said:

None of this crap bothers me.  It's a show with fucking dragons, giants and white walkers.  It's fantasy!  I'm just rolling with it.

EXACTLY my point.  Thank you for seeing that!

[glowbug]

The term psychopath and sociopath are used a lot in relation to Game of Thrones and there is a lot of confusion over what these terms mean. A psychopath is a person who lacks empathy and does not have an emotional attachment to right and wrong. Several studies have looked at whether a psychopath knows the difference between right and wrong and every one of them has found that they do know the difference they just don't care. There are many proposed subtypes of psychopaths but virtually everyone in the in the field agrees there are at least two types: blue collar psychopaths and white collar psychopaths. Sociopathy is actually an outdated term for a psychopath and is no longer used by psychologists. The term is sometimes used to refer to blue collar psychopaths as a way to distinguish them from white collar psychopaths but it isn't an accepted term in the professional world anymore. Blue collar psychopaths are typically unintelligent, lower class and uneducated, and they often end up in the criminal justice system. White collar psychopaths are typically intelligent, well educated and higher socioeconomic status. Psychopaths in the business or political field (of which there are a higher percentage of psychopaths than in the general population) are white collar psychopaths. Ted Bundy is an example of a serial killer who would be considered a white collar psychopath. Most psychopaths are not serial killers, though. They don't harm people for pleasure, they simply have no problem harming someone if they get in there way, or harming someone to get ahead.*

Arya is most definitely not a psychopath. She has the ability to empathize with others and she does have an emotional attachment to right and wrong. Both of these traits stopped her from killing multiple people including Lady Crane, Walder Frey's wife and the Lannister soldiers in the premier. She only kills those who have wronged her friends, family or herself, not in order to get ahead or because these people were standing in her way. She also isn't killing because she enjoys killing the way some psychopaths do, although she may get enjoyment from killing those who have harmed her or her family. 

Ramsay Snow was a psychopath. The Mountain was a psychopath (I don't think zombie Mountain has any agency so I don't think he's psychopath anymore). Littlefinger is a psychopath. Cersei is a psychopath. None of these people have shown empathy for others and they have no problem doing reprehensible things in order to achieve their goals no matter who gets hurt. Ramsay and the Mountain certainly derived pleasure from pain and fit what one book identified as the sadistic subtype of psychopath. Cersei and Littlefinger don't generally seem to derive pleasure from pain (though they do like to see their enemies suffer as do many non-psychopaths) but they don't have any trouble inflicting pain on anyone who gets in their way or inflicting pain in order to get ahead, even on people who have done them no wrong. 

*Note: My knowledge on psychopathy comes from researching the topic for my honors thesis in college. It is based on the research literature only.

Edited July 18, 2017 by glowbug

[piequinn35]

21 hours ago, Gertrude said:

What even grates more is that Sam already knew this information. Stannis told him at Castle Black and no one ever pumped him for info or acted on it. In this episode Sam even says that Stannis mentioned it. *facepalm*

So it was like a confirmation that Stannis was not lying :xD and Sam also learned that Danny is going to Westeros and he will tell Jon about this and about the dragonglass in Dragonstone. There you go.. Jon will meet Auntie in Dragonstone.

[Raachel2008]

1 hour ago, GrailKing said:

 

As far as the WW yes, it goes back to if each were in the other's shoes they have different opinions it has nothing to do with not believing it's has to do with what they lived.

Did I say that Sansa didn't believe the WWs? NO. I said that if she had seen them she would chek her priorities

[KaleyFirefly]

6 hours ago, Blonde Gator said:

Is GOT the series perfect?  No.  But at this point, it's better than anything on the written page.  Personally, I have my doubts that GRRM is ever going to finish the books.  I think he got caught in a trap of his own making, and he's to the point he no longer cares.  He's more or less flipped off the book readers, numerous times.  So while it's disappointing.....most book readers I know don't give a flip any longer about GRRM.  There are thousands of authors around, we can spend our money where we'd like.   Bottom line, the HBO version and the books are two different things...but it's impossible to not criticize what's missing on TV, when it impacts the story in stupid ways.

Completely agree.

[magdalene]

The TV series is not perfect by any means but it is going to give me the one thing the books haven't  -  a conclusion to the story. That counts for a lot with me.

After seeing Arya's encounter with the Lannister soldiers  I would prefer for Arya to just re-unite with her remaining family, join forces with them, give up her soul-killing quest for revenge.  Somebody else will kill Cersei.

Those soldiers also served as a good example as to why it is so important  that Jon and Co. stop and defeat the White Walkers and the Nights King - so that decent people have a chance to survive.

[KaleyFirefly]

2 hours ago, taurusrose said:

Count me as one who knows who ES is, enjoys his music, and wasn't particularly bothered by his cameo.  I'm more amazed that so many people allow stuff like this to "pull them out" of a scene.

I agree! I'm a big fan of Ed Sheeran and his wonderful voice, and enjoyed seeing him in one of my favorite shows.

Too much has already been said about Jon & Sansa, so I'll just say that I really hated seeing her undermine him in front of everyone. I want to like Sansa but damn, writers, you're making it hard. I am totally Team Jon on this one.

I did enjoy her verbal smackdown of Littlefinger was satisfying, although not smart to piss him off if they need his army

For Arya, you just have handwave that the faces confer magic illusion ability, as in the books. I was OK with it. 

Euron Greyjoy -- I liked the way he was unafraid of Cersei, and Jamie's face when he said 2 good hands! I wonder if he will get the Dragonbinder horn. I don't understand what he wants though, he already rules the Iron Islands.

Cersei -- Jamie is getting sick of her shit

Hope Olenna's plotting epic revenge for Loras & Margery's deaths.

Please, show, no more filler with Sam. Unless he's curing Jorah or something.

[Francie]

1 hour ago, taurusrose said:

None of this crap bothers me.  It's a show with fucking dragons, giants and white walkers.  It's fantasy!  I'm just rolling with it.

 

53 minutes ago, Blonde Gator said:

EXACTLY my point.  Thank you for seeing that!

That's fine. We all have different reasons for watching it.

I started watching it because it was a highly acclaimed drama, and I had two friends who assured me that it was much more than just a show about tits and dragons. To my pleasant surprise, they were right.  So far, at least. This has been is a wonderful show about familial relationships, strong characters, and overcoming adversity.

So I have no problem with taking a critical look at whether the fantasy is grounded within the realm being presented to us.  Or whether the writers are getting lazy and taking cheap cop outs. 

Edited July 18, 2017 by Francie

[stagmania]

2 hours ago, arjumand said:

Now this could be contradicted anywhere down the line, but I'm starting to see Sam being similar to books Brienne - going in circles, marking time, not achieving anything of what he's planned. I mean, sure, cleaning up feces and helping with autopsies is probably fine for entry-level trainee Maesters, but not what he came to Oldtown for.

If you're right about this, I'm even more mad they spent so much time there. I tend to think that the writing is just sloppy and they forgot that Sam already knew about the dragonglass at Dragonstone. Also, Sam is clearly an audience surrogate/wish fulfillment character/writer favorite, so they use him more than they need to. 

1 hour ago, taurusrose said:

None of this crap bothers me.  It's a show with fucking dragons, giants and white walkers.  It's fantasy!  I'm just rolling with it.

TBH, I think this is probably the way to watch the show if you want to just enjoy it, and what I strive for these days (though obviously, people can and should watch it however they like). Visually, this show is stunning. When it comes to writing, plotting, even acting sometimes? Not so much. If it didn't have these books as source material, I doubt people would be constantly looking for extra meaning or layers beyond what's on screen. It's just not that deep, but it sure is fun.

[stillshimpy]

1 hour ago, glowbug said:

The term psychopath and sociopath are used a lot in relation to Game of Thrones and there is a lot of confusion over what these terms mean. A psychopath is a person who lacks empathy and does not have an emotional attachment to right and wrong. Several studies have looked at whether a psychopath knows the difference between right and wrong and every one of them has found that they do know the difference they just don't care. There are many proposed subtypes of psychopaths but virtually everyone in the in the field agrees there are at least two types: blue collar psychopaths and white collar psychopaths. Sociopathy is actually an outdated term for a psychopath and is no longer used by psychologists. The term is sometimes used to refer to blue collar psychopaths as a way to distinguish them from white collar psychopaths but it isn't an accepted term in the professional world anymore. Blue collar psychopaths are typically unintelligent, lower class and uneducated, and they often end up in the criminal justice system. White collar psychopaths are typically intelligent, well educated and higher socioeconomic status. Psychopaths in the business or political field (of which there are a higher percentage of psychopaths than in the general population) are white collar psychopaths. Ted Bundy is an example of a serial killer who would be considered a white collar psychopath. Most psychopaths are not serial killers, though. They don't harm people for pleasure, they simply have no problem harming someone if they get in there way, or harming someone to get ahead.*

Arya is most definitely not a psychopath. She has the ability to empathize with others and she does have an emotional attachment to right and wrong. Both of these traits stopped her from killing multiple people including Lady Crane, Walder Frey's wife and the Lannister soldiers in the premier. She only kills those who have wronged her friends, family or herself, not in order to get ahead or because these people were standing in her way. She also isn't killing because she enjoys killing the way some psychopaths do, although she may get enjoyment from killing those who have harmed her or her family. 

Ramsay Snow was a psychopath. The Mountain was a psychopath (I don't think zombie Mountain has any agency so I don't think he's psychopath anymore). Littlefinger is a psychopath. Cersei is a psychopath. None of these people have shown empathy for others and they have no problem doing reprehensible things in order to achieve their goals no matter who gets hurt. Ramsay and the Mountain certainly derived pleasure from pain and fit what one book identified as the sadistic subtype of psychopath. Cersei and Littlefinger don't generally seem to derive pleasure from pain (though they do like to see their enemies suffer as do many non-psychopaths) but they don't have any trouble inflicting pain on anyone who gets in their way or inflicting pain in order to get ahead, even on people who have done them no wrong. 

*Note: My knowledge on psychopathy comes from researching the topic for my honors thesis in college. It is based on the research literature only.

Typically neither is used any longer, @glowbug.  Different forms of Personality Disorders with _____ tendencies are usually the terminology/diagnosis used at present.  But it's a bit like saying, "People aren't called manic-depressive any longer, they are called bipolar" and that's partly because there are multiple ways to be bipolar.  So it wasn't that either was found not to exist or exist to the exclusion of the other, it's that as with most things relating to terminology associated with mental illness and dysfunction.  It was, as most things are with mental health, just more complicated than it seemed when those terms were first developed.  Nuance, individual response, blah blah blah.

Regardless, I'm going to bet that George R. R. Martin did not actually research either that extensively when creating the characters.   Tryion springing a backflip to land at Jon's feet springs to mind.   I don't think he was trying to write someone with any sort of personality disorder, diagnosable or easily labeled dysfunction.   I think he thought he was writing a child's response to extreme injustice and how that would manifest strictly from Sansa or Araya's standpoint.  He was writing a character, not adhering to diagnosable medical terms, current or otherwise.  

 

I think it's just the easiest stuff for us to reach for because they are terms most people are familiar with but it isn't that either was found not to exist.  

And that's okay.  He's not actually writing a show about mental health or his main character is Monk and he should maybe understand how OCD manifests.  He was writing as story, it has developed over time.  But just judging by a variety of his medical details, I don't think he was shooting for Antisocial Personality Disorder, etc etc.   We're just all arm chairing it and reaching for the definitions we're familiar with to try and make points.  

Honestly, at times I'm fairly certain the man isn't too clear on how lactation works, sex, sepsis and that's fine in this setting.  He's writing characters and sometimes I see traits here and there of a variety of things but I don't think most are purposeful depictions of real maladies.   

They are just the stuff of good stories.   There are a couple exceptions where I think it's a pretty purposeful thing but mostly he's writing characters without having the DSM5 at his elbow.   For instance, he seemingly has no awareness of all the psychosexual stuff that he seems to be working out himself via these stories (don't freak, it's not as weird as it sounds and it's not the dusty stuff of Freud either).  There's a difference between issues and disorders.  

In terms of the characters, it's bound to come up with outdated or super current terminology as we all try to why we think what we think and what determines our opinions.  As I said earlier, it's a semantic argument vs. one that negates anything anyone is saying as a valid, point. 

Edited July 19, 2017 by stillshimpy

[GrailKing]

1 hour ago, Raachel2008 said:

Did I say that Sansa didn't believe the WWs? NO. I said that if she had seen them she would chek her priorities

I'm not saying that either just to be clear, if she had any doubt when she and John spoke it went out the window when she saw wun wun.

[WatchrTina]

3 hours ago, Blonde Gator said:

'm confused about why there's such a focus on "two weeks"

Right. She didn't need to impersonate him for two weeks. The scene where she kills him probably didn't take place the same day as the first feast when Bronn and Jamie were there.  The show is sometimes clunky in its depiction of the passage of time (e.g., Varys' magical ability to get from Dorne to the deck of Danny's ship and the truly amazing speed with which the Iron Islanders rebuilt the fleet that Yara stole) so I think we should assume the "Frey Pie" scene was actually a good 10-12 days after that first feast.  That gives Arya time to work undercover as the new serving wench, get the lay of the land, find out who she wants to invite to the follow-up feast, kill and dismember the two Freys she baked in the pie, and generally make her plans.  Then she kills Walder, hides his body, steals his face, sends out orders for a follow-up banquet, and then s/he acts moody and difficult for a couple of days (perfectly in keeping with Walder's personality) and avoids talking to  anyone too much (maybe even claiming some serious digestive difficulties -- that'd keep people away) while awaiting the Banquet of Northern Revenge.

Edited July 19, 2017 by WatchrTina

[Blonde Gator]

1 minute ago, WatchrTina said:

Yep, that's how I made peace with Arya impersonating Walder.  The scene where she kills him probably didn't take place the same day as the first feast when Bronn and Jamie were there.  The show is sometimes clunky in its depiction of the passage of time (e.g., Varys' magical ability to get from Dorne to the deck of Danny's ship and the truly amazing speed with which the Iron Islanders rebuilt the fleet that Yara stole) so I think we should assume the "Frey Pie" scene was actually a good 10-12 days after that first feast.  That gives Arya time to work undercover as the new serving wench, get the lay of the land, find out who she wants to invite to the follow-up feast, kill and dismember the two Freys she baked in the pie, and generally make her plans.  Then she kills Walder, hides his body, steals his face, sends out orders for a follow-up banquet, and then s/he acts moody for a couple of days (in keeping with Walder's personality) and avoids talking to  anyone too much (maybe even claiming some serious digestive difficulties -- that'd keep people away) while awaiting the Banquet of Northern Revenge.

Yep.  In the series, time is a fluid and elastic thing.  If you choose to ignore it, it makes life easier.  I was just kind of surprised at how many people got hung up on the mechanics of Arya's most excellent vacation at The Twins.  Winter seems to be very slow in the getting here, as well.  Not to harp on the books, but the LEAP that Theon & Sansa (or fArya) took off the wall at Winterfell was supposedly into a gigantic snowbank.  I've yet to see any gigantic snowbanks.  And so on.  Time is fluid.  And elastic.

[Oscirus]

3 hours ago, Blonde Gator said:

And Walder Frey DOESN'T have all of those same people to "assist" him?  You can bet that all of those positions are not filled by Frey-spawn, they are lowly positions.  I am throwing the BS card.

So you think:

1. Arrogant Walder would have somebody around to advise him on how to run his castle

2. Even if he did that the Frey's would be anywhere close to as organized as the Starks?

That's  what  you  should be throwing your bs card at.

Edited July 19, 2017 by Oscirus

[Oscirus]

1 hour ago, WatchrTina said:

Right. She didn't need to impersonate him for two weeks. The scene where she kills him probably didn't take place the same day as the first feast when Bronn and Jamie were there.  The show is sometimes clunky in its depiction of the passage of time (e.g., Varys' magical ability to get from Dorne to the deck of Danny's ship and the truly amazing speed with which the Iron Islanders rebuilt the fleet that Yara stole) so I think we should assume the "Frey Pie" scene was actually a good 10-12 days after that first feast.  That gives Arya time to work undercover as the new serving wench, get the lay of the land, find out who she wants to invite to the follow-up feast, kill and dismember the two Freys she baked in the pie, and generally make her plans.  Then she kills Walder, hides his body, steals his face, sends out orders for a follow-up banquet, and then s/he acts moody and difficult for a couple of days (perfectly in keeping with Walder's personality) and avoids talking to  anyone too much (maybe even claiming some serious digestive difficulties -- that'd keep people away) while awaiting the Banquet of Northern Revenge.

In those times with the Freys all spread out, you think it would take a couple of days for them to not only  receive the Ravens but to arrive as well? 

Edited July 19, 2017 by Oscirus

[glowbug]

1 hour ago, stillshimpy said:

Typically neither is used any longer, @glowbug.  Different forms of Personality Disorders with _____ tendencies are usually the terminology/diagnosis used at present.  But it's a bit like saying, "People aren't called manic-depressive any longer, they are called bipolar" and that's partly because there are multiple ways to be bipolar.  So it wasn't that either was found not to exist or exist to the exclusion of the other, it's that as with most things relating to terminology associated with mental illness and dysfunction.  It was, as most things are with mental health, just more complicated than it seemed when those terms were first developed.  Nuance, individual response, blah blah blah.

Regardless, I'm going to bet that George R. R. Martin did not actually research either that extensively when creating the characters.   Tryion springing a backflip to land at Jon's feet springs to mind.   I don't think he was trying to write someone with any sort of personality disorder, diagnosable or easily labeled dysfunction.   I think he thought he was writing a child's response to extreme injustice and how that would manifest strictly from Sansa or Araya's standpoint.  He was writing a character, not adhering to diagnosable medical terms, current or otherwise.  

 

I think it's just the easiest stuff for us to reach for because they are terms most people are familiar with but it isn't that either was found not to exist.  

And that's okay.  He's not actually writing a show about mental health or his main character is Monk and he should maybe understand how OCD manifests.  He was writing as story, it has developed over time.  But just judging by a variety of his medical details, I don't think he was shooting for Antisocial Personality Disorder, etc etc.   We're just all arm chairing it and reaching for the definitions we're familiar with to try and make points.  

Honestly, at times I'm fairly certain the man isn't too clear on how lactation works, sex, sepsis and that's fine in this setting.  He's writing characters and sometimes I see traits here and there of a variety of things but I don't think most are purposeful depictions of real maladies.   

They are just the stuff of good stories.   There are a couple exceptions where I think it's a pretty purposeful thing but mostly he's writing characters without having the DSM5 at his elbow.   For instance, he seemingly has no awareness of all the psychosexual stuff that he seems to be working out himself via these stories (don't freak, it's not as weird as it sounds and it's not the dusty stuff of Freud either).  There's a difference between issues and disorders.  

In terms of the characters, it's bound to come up with outdated or super current terminology as we all try to why we think what we think and what determines our opinions.  As I said earlier, it's a semantic argument vs. one that negates anything anyone is saying as a valid, point. 

Psychopath is certainly not a diagnosis and I didn't mean to imply that it was. It's not in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM). The closest thing to a psychopath is Antisocial Personality Disorder, which is an Axis II disorder. Many psychopaths would meet the criteria for antisocial personality disorder and many people who meet the criteria for antisocial personality disorder are psychopaths but not all. The difference is that psychopathy is about thought processes and antisocial personify disorder is more about behavior. Psychopathy is very much still something that is studied by some psychologists and neuroscientists and books are still written about it but most therapists don't know much about it since it's not something that can be diagnosed.

In any case, Arya does not qualify as a psychopath. I agree that GRRM did not study the field and was not trying to describe a psychopath but I would say that several of his characters would be considered psychopaths if they were real. I mostly took issue with people saying Arya is a psychopath because a psychopath is not merely a killer but specifically someone who doesn't have empathy, killer or not, and I don't think that describes her at all. 

P.S. @stillshimpy I'm glad you're back. It was a long wait for season 7 without your read through of the series. I enjoy your comentary as always. 

ETA: I'm sorry if I came across preachy or as if I was dismissing anyone's opinion over semantics. Psychopathy is just something that is fascinating to me and I've studied quite a bit and I love to educate others because I enjoyed learning about it. I'm also a bit of a know it all clearly. ;)

Edited July 19, 2017 by glowbug

[Francie]

1 hour ago, WatchrTina said:

Right. She didn't need to impersonate him for two weeks. The scene where she kills him probably didn't take place the same day as the first feast when Bronn and Jamie were there.  The show is sometimes clunky in its depiction of the passage of time (e.g., Varys' magical ability to get from Dorne to the deck of Danny's ship and the truly amazing speed with which the Iron Islanders rebuilt the fleet that Yara stole) so I think we should assume the "Frey Pie" scene was actually a good 10-12 days after that first feast.  That gives Arya time to work undercover as the new serving wench, get the lay of the land, find out who she wants to invite to the follow-up feast, kill and dismember the two Freys she baked in the pie, and generally make her plans.  Then she kills Walder, hides his body, steals his face, sends out orders for a follow-up banquet, and then s/he acts moody and difficult for a couple of days (perfectly in keeping with Walder's personality) and avoids talking to  anyone too much (maybe even claiming some serious digestive difficulties -- that'd keep people away) while awaiting the Banquet of Northern Revenge.

 

I just find it interesting, and a little sad, that we've given this more thought here than clearly the writers ever did.

I do think the writing matters. At least, that's why I'm here. So I feel no qualms about critiquing it. I do think the show has had some high points with its writing.   Slightly uneven, but more good than bad. And the high points have been extraordinarily high.

And this premiere episode takes me back to 1997,  when I  walked out of the theater after seeing Titanic and said, "Yeah the special effects and costumes were good, but the writing sure sucked."

[stillshimpy]

55 minutes ago, glowbug said:

P.S. @stillshimpy I'm glad you're back. It was a long wait for season 7 without your read through of the series. I enjoy your comentary as always. 

ETA: I'm sorry if I came across preachy or as if I was dismissing anyone's opinion over semantics. Psychopathy is just something that is fascinating to me and I've studied quite a bit and I love to educate others because I enjoyed learning about it. I'm also a bit of a know it all clearly. ;)

You didn't come across as preachy at all, @glowbug :)   It's good to see your screenname too and I enjoyed your posts :)  Thanks for sharing those insights :D 

[anamika]

5 hours ago, SeanC said:

She absolutely knows about Robb's mistakes.  Everybody does.  Indeed, Lord Glover berated her for them last season, recall.

But  if she knows Robb's mistakes, then why is she chiding Jon for doing the opposite of what Robb did?

Last season she wanted to go to the Karstarks for help. Davos explains to her that since Robb punished the father, the son would no longer be on their side. Jon forgives the daughter for her father's betrayal and Sansa goes - Jon, don't be like Robb. What is she trying to say? As, I have already mentioned several times - she gives out vague platitudes that have no bearing on the situation.

Though, I should say that David and Dan know their audience well - All they need to get viewers praising Sansa's political acumen is to have her state vague generalities like this once in a while - Sansa said don't be like Ned and Robb!! OMG, she's so smart!!

5 hours ago, SeanC said:

Er, Sansa didn't say she didn't love Ned and Robb.  But we haven't seen any of the others opine on their political acumen. Pretty much every political player in the show, including Tyrion, has criticized Ned (Tyrion specifically remarked "I'm not Ned Stark.  I understand how the game is played.").  The writers' view of Ned is 'nice guy, not very smart'.  

 Er, neither did I. I criticized her for accusing Ned of being a fool who failed to protect her. Which is clearly not true. Ned protected her with his life. She is standing there alive because of him. The writers view of Ned as being not smart is often espoused by Ned's enemies, namely the Lannisters and LF - people in the South. Jon, Arya, Bran, Stannis, Davos, the Northerners all hold Ned in high esteem. Ned ruled the North well. He was a vital cog in Robert's rebellion. He got taken down due to the underhanded dealings of Cersei and LF while he was alone in enemy territory - that does not make him a fool. And if Sansa thinks of her father as the southerners do, then she does not deserve to be in charge of Winterfell. WF is not KL.

[SeanC]

22 minutes ago, anamika said:

But  if she knows Robb's mistakes, then why is she chiding Jon for doing the opposite of what Robb did?

Because the writing on this show isn't that great on details.

Quote

 Er, neither did I. I criticized her for accusing Ned of being a fool who failed to protect her. Which is clearly not true. Ned protected her with his life. She is standing there alive because of him.

Ned took her to King's Landing where she was captured and held for years by the Lannisters, and did nothing much to prepare her for the real world (which is a point made in this episode, which Jon as much as concedes).  It would be fairly obvious why she would think that.  Sansa didn't say he didn't try to protect her, but that he failed, which he ultimately did.

Quote

The writers view of Ned as being not smart is often espoused by Ned's enemies, namely the Lannisters and LF - people in the South. Jon, Arya, Bran, Stannis, Davos, the Northerners all hold Ned in high esteem. Ned ruled the North well. He was a vital cog in Robert's rebellion. He got taken down due to the underhanded dealings of Cersei and LF while he was alone in enemy territory - that does not make him a fool. And if Sansa thinks of her father as the southerners do, then she does not deserve to be in charge of Winterfell. WF is not KL.

There's no difference between the North and the South -- the writers made that point explicitly in Season 6, and indeed, they made it by having Sansa suggest there was a difference and Davos argue otherwise and be validated.  So whether or not the people criticizing him are Southern seems to me irrelevant.

None of the people you cite have been recorded as defending Ned's decisions in King's Landing.  Generally they've spoken to his moral character, with which Sansa took no issue.

Edited July 19, 2017 by SeanC

[SeanC]

4 minutes ago, doram said:

Well Ned did plan on smuggling her out to King's Landing but Sansa savvily decided to out her father's plan to her future mother-in-law. 

That didn't happen in the show, which is what's being discussed.

Though even in the books, I don't think that really changes it, because Ned did a crap job of parenting Sansa in AGOT, between putting her in a situation where she was wide open to the influence of people with known hostile motives and then ignoring the obvious signs that she needed course-correction.

Quote

Then it kind of begs the question why the North was unanimously electing Jon Snow the King in the North because they were so impressed with him rushing into an open field to save his half-brother's life? 

I thought the whole point of Jon's KitN moment was to show that the North did value these things - they did Remember. They had just forgotten for sometime but faced with Jon's courage (and with a reminder from Lady Bear), they Remembered. 

We got virtually no explanation of the dynamics of Jon's being elected, but I don't think it's a terribly meaningful endorsement of the North remembering anything.  The show didn't give us "the North remembers", it gave us "the North remembers to back the winning team."

Edited July 19, 2017 by SeanC

[Blonde Gator]

2 hours ago, Oscirus said:

So you think:

1. Arrogant Walder would have somebody around to advise him on how to run his castle

2. Even if he did that the Frey's would be anywhere close to as organized as the Starks?

That's  what  you  should be throwing your bs card at.

Did I SAY "advise"?  No I didn't.

He needs no advice, he's 90 years old.  He knows how things should be run, and he has 45 male children to do each and every task for him.  Each and every little detail.  That's how they learn to hopefully be the next Lord Frey.  Muster the maids, the cooks, the smiths, the stone masons, the stable boys, the chimney sweeps, the janitors, and so on.

Do you imagine that Tywin Lannister oversaw the sewers of Casterly Rock?  No, he gave that little supervision chore to his son, Tyrion.

[Raachel2008]

9 minutes ago, doram said:

The whole Karstark business started because Robb cut off Lord K's head for killing his Lannister PoWs which was a lawful and just punishment.

No, the whole Karstark bussiness started when Catelyn freed Jamie after he killed Karstark's son and she promised him Jamie was going to be punished. Sorry, but that mess starts with Catelyn.

[GrailKing]

5 hours ago, Blonde Gator said:

And Walder Frey DOESN'T have all of those same people to "assist" him?  You can bet that all of those positions are not filled by Frey-spawn, they are lowly positions.  I am throwing the BS card.

My 2 cents: Walder Frey has been shown as a miser since day one, makes lots of money but won't part with it, especially with so many Freys of age and more than enough with education to run that castle themselves.

[screamin]

6 hours ago, taurusrose said:

Sansa better shape up quickly or I'm going to be calling for her head on a weekly basis. I've never liked her and this claim that Jon should defer to her because she has intimate knowledge of Cersei and LF is bullshit.  If she wanted to be helpful, she'd tell Jon unequivocally that there is a snake in their circle and back up the claim with facts, not cryptic remarks.  As far as Cersei is concerned, for all of her little rants and threats from KL (and Sansa's worry about what she's capable of), Cersei should be concentrating on the biggest threat to her continued existence, DT.  The fact that she isn't just proves she's a petty idiot.  The idea that she has this long scary reach into the North at this point in time is ludicrous.

 

Hi, the comment that you're eloquently calling bullshit is mine. It was actually directed, IIRC, at another poster. This poster, when I suggested that if Jon wanted Sansa to be silent in public if she disagreed with him, then he should make an effort to talk to her in private about his decisions and get her opinion on them, even if he ultimately decided against her advice, replied that Jon shouldn't feel any need to discuss his decisions with her at all, even in private, basically cutting her off any chance at input into his decision-making - even though  he allows his lords that input, and even though she has as much power as any of his lords, and even though his decisions affect her as much as they do any of his subjects, and even though he's his sister.

I said that refusing to discuss his decisions with her AT ALL before making them a done deal would be both stupid and disrespectful, and I stand by that. It would be stupid because like it or not, Sansa really does know more about Cersei and LF than anyone else on Jon's council. And yes, I totally agree that Cersei is a petty idiot. That petty idiot still managed to hire a spymaster good enough to blow up the High Sept, with every powerful enemy of Cersei's in KL in it, and put her on the Iron Throne, when she was walking naked through the streets a few months before. Petty idiots can be deadly. Ask any of the thousands who have died in the war that resulted because a petty idiot just HAD to fuck his sister at the wrong time...or because another petty idiot just HAD to challenge his petty idiot brother for the kingdom instead of uniting against the common threat - or because another petty idiot just HAD to get revenge on the man who broke his engagement with his daughter - you get it. Petty idiots can be deadly in Westeros when they're powerful enough and have clever enough help. Just ask the High Sparrow, Margaery, and her father and brother, if you can sweep their bits together. Jon and Sansa are perfectly aware what Cersei's clever spymaster managed to accomplish. We've seen that despite the winter, travel is still perfectly possible all the way to the Wall. Why assume the spymaster is incapable of sending anyone to Winterfell, when that's what spymasters DO? Cersei's idiocy and her distance do not mean she is no longer a threat - and therefore if Jon absolutely refused to hear any information from Sansa in public or private about, say, Cersei, before making decisions regarding Cersei as a threat, he'd be (wait for it) a petty idiot.

Mind you, I made it clear that I didn't think that Jon was under any obligation to agree with Sansa after hearing her out - just that he should listen and take her opinion into account. Because , as I also said, it would be damned disrespectful if he didn't, and I stand by that too. Let's say that Catelyn wouldn't argue with Ned in public, because a family should present a united front in public...quite reasonable. But does this mean that Ned has NO obligation to discuss his plans with Catelyn in private before making decisions that affect the whole family? Hell no - and not just because they're married. It would be just as disrespectful if Ned were single and Lord and he were making decisions that would affect his sister Lyanna without consulting her. He has the power of decision making as the lord, his decisions affect the whole family, and to refuse her even the chance to have her voice heard when he's deciding for her life as well as his own would be monumentally douchey.

Not that I believe Jon is a douche. I have faith that he's not going to agree with that poster, and that he's going to make a bit more effort to hear Sansa out now and then, because he's really a nice boy at heart. ;)

Quote

I'm pretty sure it did happen in the show. In the scene where Sansa was talking about Ned taking 'milk of the poppy' and it addling his brains (nice, Sansa, really nice), she referred to an earlier conversation she had with Cersei.

IIRC, that was after Ned was arrested, and Sansa was pleading that Ned's life be spared. When Ned was accused of treason for calling Joffrey a bastard, she couldn't very well say "Well, Dad was right, you totally are." That would be treason, and she'd be in the cell right along with Ned. Since saying that Joffrey is a bastard is treason in that court, the only thing she COULD say in Ned's favor was that he MUST not have been in his right mind when he said it. She did the best she could with what she had at the time.

Edited July 19, 2017 by screamin

[AshleyN]

6 hours ago, arjumand said:

Now this could be contradicted anywhere down the line, but I'm starting to see Sam being similar to books Brienne - going in circles, marking time, not achieving anything of what he's planned. I mean, sure, cleaning up feces and helping with autopsies is probably fine for entry-level trainee Maesters, but not what he came to Oldtown for.

Except that the showrunners completely rewrote Brienne's story for that very reason. I know people like to complain about the Benioff and Weiss a lot, but the one thing people seem to agree that they're better at than Martin is staying focused on the main story. They've done a ton of streamlining and cut out whole storylines that they deemed extraneous. I feel like if Sam at the Citadel wasn't going to turn out to be important in the end they wouldn't have bothered to send him there in the first place.

Edited July 19, 2017 by AshleyN

[SeanC]

5 minutes ago, doram said:

I'm pretty sure it did happen in the show. In the scene where Sansa was talking about Ned taking 'milk of the poppy' and it addling his brains (nice, Sansa, really nice), she referred to an earlier conversation she had with Cersei. 

No, it didn't happen.  Sansa in the show was still at the Tower of the Hand when the Lannisters attacked.  The writers explicitly said they took it out because they thought it was implausible for a 13-year-old Sansa, since they'd aged her two years.

Quote

I'm not sure that Ned is supposed to blame for Sansa's lack of basic common sense. Sansa watched Cersei order Lady dead, heard Joffrey use language on her sister that made her ears burn, watched him act as a complete monster to the serving boy, but a few smiles and trinkets and she was back to thinking they walked on water.

Sansa has her own blind spots, but, and this bears repeating, she is eleven years old.  Ned is her father; he has, and expects to exercise, virtually total control over her life, and he has far more power and information about the situation than she has.  He brought her to court and betrothed her to Joffrey, letting her believe by implication that everything was alright for months, and sprung the contrary on her at the last second.  He never, as far as we know, spoke to her about the Kingsroad incident, despite seeing that she buckled under pressure.  He made no attempt to educate her on the dynamics of the court despite her notional destiny as the future queen.

A lot of this is plot-necessitated.  The plot of AGOT/Season 1 requires Ned to be a seriously inattentive parent, otherwise a bunch of stuff in Sansa and Arya's stories that GRRM needs to happen wouldn't happen.  But it's there, nevertheless.  The same could be said for Catelyn's seemingly supplying the girls with no political education whatsoever, something that has frustrated fandom debates for 20 years, because it doesn't remotely feel like something Catelyn would do.

Edited July 19, 2017 by SeanC

[GrailKing]

14 minutes ago, SeanC said:

Though even in the books, I don't think that really changes it, because Ned did a crap job of parenting Sansa in AGOT, between putting her in a situation where she was wide open to the influence of people with known hostile motives and then ignoring the obvious signs that she needed course-correction.

Especially after setting things in motion with Van Poole, Ned tells us that his daughters safety, can't keep him from doing what his honor dictates!?

Ned get your house out first BEFORE you tell Cersei that when your hubby gets back you'll be dead so run!

[SeanC]

4 minutes ago, doram said:

Robb was 2 years old and made King in the North. 

Arya was 9 - in the same situation - and managed to stick to being loyal to her father. 

7-year-old Bran ruled Winterfell in his brother's absence. 

And?

None of that changes that Sansa desperately needed parental guidance, and didn't get it.  She was put in a confusing and complicated situation (by Ned) and floundered.

Bran is a good counterexample, in fact, as he had Rodrik Cassell and Maester Luwin doing all the real work and advising him.  If Robb had left him in charge of Winterfell with no advisors, that would have been negligent in the extreme.

Robb, likewise, had advisors (most obviously his mother), was older (still young), and had been trained extensively to take a leadership role by Ned.

Edited July 19, 2017 by SeanC

[WatchrTina]

You know what no one has mentioned yet?  Hodor.  Are we going to see him come back as a wight?  It would be BRUTAL, but also awesome. I'll bet he is and I'll bet the actor who plays him is under strict orders not to tell anyone.

And if zombie Hodor turns up with zombie Summer (Bran's wolf) in tow?  Oh the horror! 

[Raachel2008]

6 minutes ago, doram said:

It's not really significant to the Jon vs Robb argument, though.

Of course it is, though I didn't point it because of that.

My point is that when Catelyn freed Jamie she started the mess with the Karstarks. Jamie could have been a prisioner for years before Robb had to make a decision and Karstark would have to wait - and he would.  Catelyn had no right to do it, what she did was treason, and had it been anyone else, Robb wouldn't have thought twice before killing her. He didn't, for several reasons. So when Karstark kills the two Lannisters and Robb kills Karstark, what was he expecting? The Karstarks felt triple betrayed: the death of Karstark's son was not punished, Catelyn was not punished for her treason thus sending the message that some North people have more rights than otherss, and Karstark himself was killed in what, I'm sure, the Karstarks perceived as unfair in a way even if they knew that Robb could not allow him to not be punished.

Though I doubt this thinking process was in Jon's mind when he pardoned Alys Karstark, he fixed that mess in doing exactly what Robb didn't.

[GrailKing]

11 minutes ago, doram said:

Sansa that convinced herself that marrying the Bolton was a good idea because Littlefinger would never hurt her. 

That's not why, and thinking he loves her isn't it either.

It was this: You grieve for your parents, you've been running all your life, there is no justice in this world unless you get it yourself, you're Sansa Stark oldest surviving child of Lord Eddard and Catlyn Stark......AVENGE THEM ! 

[Katsullivan]

19 minutes ago, SeanC said:

No, it didn't happen.  Sansa in the show was still at the Tower of the Hand when the Lannisters attacked.  The writers explicitly said they took it out because they thought it was implausible for a 13-year-old Sansa, since they'd aged her two years.

The writers decided early on that Sansa was going to be their little pet and insulate her from every bad decision she's ever made.

1 minute ago, GrailKing said:

That's not why, and thinking he loves her isn't it either.

It was this: You grieve for your parents, you've been running all your life, there is no justice in this world unless you get it yourself, you're Sansa Stark oldest surviving child of Lord Eddard and Catlyn Stark......AVENGE THEM ! 

LOL! How was she supposed to avenge them by marrying into the family that murdered them?

[screamin]

9 hours ago, Katsullivan said:

Nice analysis @screamin. But you're doing the writers's job for them. The show should have already made this clear.

I know, right?! It just frustrates me deeply how badly the show's managed to screw up the portrayal of Littlefinger. I suppose it was foreshadowed from his first scene with him ridiculously monologuing at acrobatic whores, but the first few seasons still managed to adequately portray his deceptively hidden gladhanding menace and treachery...which makes his current lobotomized descent into idiocy that much more annoying. I mean, he's done more damage on the whole to the Starks than anyone, and none of the Starks understand that even now. He's been one of their worst enemies, still hanging on and endangering them long after many others have died. It SHOULD be difficult and dangerous to defeat him, and therefore it SHOULD be all the more satisfying when one of the Starks finally outsmarts him and brings him down. But as stupid as he's acting now, he doesn't seem much of a challenge, and I'm terribly afraid that therefore his defeat after so long will seem like an unimportant afterthought, with all the dramatic impact of a fart in a phone booth.

Edited July 19, 2017 by screamin
speling iz importint

[SeanC]

12 minutes ago, doram said:

You mentioned Robb being trained to take a leadership role but did Sansa not get any training to be a Lady to some Lord eventually? Was she dropped from the sky at the age of 11/13? Didn't she have a Septa with her at Winterfell to whom she constantly gave lip to because she was about to be Queen? 

Sansa did receive an education, but, as noted, it appears to have had absolutely no political component.  This is actually quite contrived on GRRM's part, and doesn't feel like something Catelyn (who would have been in charge of this) would have done, since she was a savvy, politically-minded woman herself.  But there it is.  That's a baseline premise of Sansa's arc, in fact.

Quote

Arya and Dany - girls like Sansa so probably a better comparison - had literal no one. Dany was "trained" by Viserys who re-assured her that he'd let 10,000 men rape her to get what he wanted.

Yet every mistake that Sansa made was Ned's fault?

I'm not clear the exact situational comparison you're making with Dany.  Dany was older, had completely different (and much less sheltered) life experience, and took time to grow into her role as khaleesi.  Beyond which, she is a different character.  Dany is pretty much a world-historic force of nature, in fact.  That Sansa isn't as capable as that doesn't somehow render her not needing parenting, particularly as (unlike Dany, sadly) she actually has parents.

Quote

It's also worth noting that of all the Stark children - Sansa was the only one who singled Jon out for ill-treatment. This was before King's Landing, before her bethrotal to Joffrey, before her stupid father failed to train her.

I'm not sure what that has to do with what we were talking about, but anyway, yes, Sansa followed her mother's example, since her mother was the main influence on her upbringing.

Quote

Who put Sansa in the confusing and complicated situation of thinking Cersei and Joffrey were good people after Lady was murdered? Or of not being able to tell the truth when she was questioned about the events of that day? 

She blamed Cersei initially, in fact.  But regardless, I never said that Sansa did not have her own blind spots; indeed, I already explicitly noted that.  But you know who observed Sansa's struggle at the Kingsroad?  Ned.  What did he do about it?  Nothing whatsoever.  No guidance or correction, no attempt to help her figure out how to act in the future toward Cersei and Joffrey, nothing.  He is the adult here.  Instead, he encouraged Sansa to think that everything was fine and to mentally adjust herself to marrying Joffrey.

Edited July 19, 2017 by SeanC

[Katsullivan]

31 minutes ago, doram said:

If the North remembered to back the winning team, then rather than 63 Bears, all the armies of the North would have joined their armies to Bolton from the start. 

You know in all this Jon vs Sansa argument, most people tend to forget this. Other than the Bears and the wildings, and eventually the Vale, what was Jon's army made up of? So who was Karhold and Umber-land supposed to go to? If Lyanna Mormont wasn't angling to add Karhold to her island, I don't see why any of the Lords who basically sat their asses on the fence should have deserved it. Jon's decision was fair no matter how you look at it. 

[GrailKing]

2 minutes ago, Katsullivan said:

The writers decided early on that Sansa was going to be their little pet and insulate her from every bad decision she's ever made.

LOL! How was she supposed to avenge them by marrying into the family that murdered them?

She refused LF worked on her emotions, basically saying you can take them from inside, her choice from LF was no choice as I mentioned earlier today, it was a play of using revenge.

As Sansa told us last night her father never let them see how dirty the world actually is, and there is a possibility Ned knew nothing of Ramsey.

Later we see Sansa use that same method on Theon : You're Theon Grayjoy........

[SeanC]

Just now, Katsullivan said:

You know in all this Jon vs Sansa argument, most people tend to forget this. Other than the Bears and the wildings, and eventually the Vale, what was Jon's army made up of? So who was Karhold and Umber-land supposed to go to? If Lyanna Mormont wasn't angling to add Karhold to her island, I don't see why any of the Lords who basically sat their asses on the fence should have deserved it. Jon's decision was fair no matter how you look at it. 

They had three backers from amongst the nobles -- Lyanna, and two unseen lords, Hornwood and Mazin.

[screamin]

20 minutes ago, doram said:

It's also worth noting that of all the Stark children - Sansa was the only one who singled Jon out for ill-treatment. This was before King's Landing, before her bethrotal to Joffrey, before her stupid father failed to train her.

 

Who put Sansa in the confusing and complicated situation of thinking Cersei and Joffrey were good people after Lady was murdered? Or of not being able to tell the truth when she was questioned about the events of that day? 

When did Jon ever remember Sansa ill-treating him?

As for who put Sansa in the position of thinking Cersei and Joffrey were good people after they murdered Lady? Well, perhaps some of the blame might be laid at the feet of the man who decided to continue Sansa's betrothal to Joffrey after they murdered Lady - thus putting 13 year old Sansa in the position of choosing either to believe that Joffrey was potentially good despite his actions, or that Joffrey was evil but her beloved father was going to make her marry him anyway. Doesn't Ned's silent acquiescence in continuing the betrothal contribute greatly to Sansa's impression that Micah and Lady's deaths were NBD? Silence gives consent, after all.

Edited July 19, 2017 by screamin