S07.E07: The Dragon And The Wolf

[stillshimpy]

12 minutes ago, screamin said:

What I remember from the book is that Robert refused to accept his resignation, told him if Ned gave the pin back to him again, he'd pin it on Jaime Lannister, I think - or Tywin? Can't quite recall. Either way, Robert's threat was enough to make him stay put in KL. If only he'd had the fortitude to go through with his resignation and leave - but he was too faithful to Robert.

 

That was after Jaime Lannister attacked Ned which was after Ned resigned as Hand, wasn't it?  I can't recall from the book but I thought it was treated the same way.  Ned resigns, Jaime wounds Ned, Cersei wants him locked up, Robert defies the Lannister for pretty much the only time , gives him back the hand pin and goes off to drunkenly hunt and is killed by the boar after being given drugged wine.  On his death bed he tells Ned he was right about not killing Dany.  Then he dies. 

[mac123x]

Having the benefit of hindsight and a week to think about it, I've come up with some slight modifications they could have done to Ep 6 and 7 to make the WF story line a little more palatable.  Not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but it lowers the Starks-are-morons rating a little.

Ep 6:

Keep the Sansa / Arya confrontation scene where Sansa finds the bag-o-faces.  It plays out as described, but with the following adders:

1.  After Arya leaves, linger on Sansa staring at the dagger.  Then she looks up, gets a different facial expression (like narrows her eyes, hardens her mouth) and leave the room looking determined.  Cut to:

2.  Arya walking down a hallway.  She stops for a second (like a thought suddenly occurred to her), then turns to head off in a different direction.  Cut to:

3.  Bran sitting by his fire when there's a knock on the door.  "Come in."  We don't see who is there.  "I knew you would come".  End scene

 

Insert one week of fans speculating about who visited him.  Sansa?  Arya?  Littlefinger?  Ghost?

 

Ep 7 plays as is. 

As soon as Sansa says "what is your answer.... Lord Baelish?" it would have clicked for everyone that (3) above was where the tide turned against Littlefinger.  It'd give Sansa a bit of cleverness in that her initial scene with Littlefinger would have been an act.

 

For added tension, they could have had Sansa and Littlefinger's first scene include a servant bringing them something to drink / stoking the fire etc.... the Frey servant girl.  Audience gasps "oh NO, don't drink that!"  Of course, it'd turn out later that Sansa wanted Arya-in-disguise there to hear what Petyr had to say.

[GrailKing]

1 hour ago, Blonde Gator said:

There was a bit of a corollary to Ned's axiom about death sentences and execution (he who passes the sentence should swing the blade):

A ruler who hides behind paid executioners soon forgets what death is. ~ Bran[1] Game of Thrones

The second part of "Ned's Rules of Execution" may be even more important than the first part.

Your quote correct ?

So you're upset because Sansa herself, didn't do the deed ?

Was Sansa the only Stark that was aggrieved ?

Did Sansa have Royce do the deed or some soldier of the Starks or Arryns ?

I'm pretty sure Arrya knew Sansa wasn't trained for that, I'm sure that the trio knew the role each was going to do.

So what is your problem with the way it happened? Ned's rules were used, just adapted for children.

[Bryce Lynch]

2 minutes ago, GrailKing said:

If you consider fear in her eyes, and taking as much time as she could to forestall it as consent, this was a forced act, and Tyrion knew she wasn't consenting. 

Her action clearly showed she was not clearly and without question submitting to this bedding, and when she tells Tyrion, ( paraphrased )"and if I never want you in my bed my lord" shut the door on her willingly giving consent.

She seemed willing to "do her duty", but greatly preferred not to have sex with Tyrion.  I don't think Tyrion would have had to forcibly rape her.  But, beyond that he thought it was wrong to do it, if she was only doing it out of duty, but would rather not.   He then made it clear that they would never have sex until such time as she wanted to.  Her response indicated that she didn't think she would ever want to, and Tyrion's response made it clear that if she never wanted to it would never happen.

[GrailKing]

3 minutes ago, Bryce Lynch said:

She seemed willing to "do her duty", but greatly preferred not to have sex with Tyrion.  I don't think Tyrion would have had to forcibly rape her.  But, beyond that he thought it was wrong to do it, if she was only doing it out of duty, but would rather not.   He then made it clear that they would never have sex until such time as she wanted to.  Her response indicated that she didn't think she would ever want to, and Tyrion's response made it clear that if she never wanted to it would never happen.

I don't think it was willing at all, she was hesitating removing her garments, her facial expressions also said no.

In the end she escaped sex with a Lannister.

[Blonde Gator]

7 minutes ago, GrailKing said:

Your quote correct ?

So you're upset because Sansa herself, didn't do the deed ?

Was Sansa the only Stark that was aggrieved ?

Did Sansa have Royce do the deed or some soldier of the Starks or Arryns ?

I'm pretty sure Arrya knew Sansa wasn't trained for that, I'm sure that the trio knew the role each was going to do.

So what is your problem with the way it happened? Ned's rules were used, just adapted for children.

This will be the third time I've said/written it, I am NOT upset at all about Sansa using Arya as her weapon.  Is that CLEAR enough for you?

Yes, my quote is correct, which is why I put in the BOOK and CHAPTER.  Yet you fail to comprehend the point that the second part of Ned's philosophy on executions implies what a good ruler does in general.

Do me a favor, quote MY posts, exactly, with the words and sentences I used that gives you the idea I have any issue at all with the way Littlefinger got capped, by Arya, on Sansa's order.   Just one will do.

Thank you.

[stillshimpy]

24 minutes ago, Bryce Lynch said:

She seemed willing to "do her duty", but greatly preferred not to have sex with Tyrion.  I don't think Tyrion would have had to forcibly rape her.  But, beyond that he thought it was wrong to do it, if she was only doing it out of duty, but would rather not.   He then made it clear that they would never have sex until such time as she wanted to.  Her response indicated that she didn't think she would ever want to, and Tyrion's response made it clear that if she never wanted to it would never happen.

Shades of Todd Akin territory when talking about a "forcible rape".   Sex without consent is rape.  It doesn't matter if it is forcible or violent.  

Also, the use of the word "duty" is problematic because she was forced into a marriage by her captors.  Duty is similarly off the table. 

ETA: One of the weirder things that is set to happen for next season is that Sansa and Tryion will be on course to meet again.  

Edited September 1, 2017 by stillshimpy

[GrailKing]

7 minutes ago, Blonde Gator said:

This will be the third time I've said/written it, I am NOT upset at all about Sansa using Arya as her weapon.  Is that CLEAR enough for you?

Yes, my quote is correct, which is why I put in the BOOK and CHAPTER.  Yet you fail to comprehend the point that the second part of Ned's philosophy on executions implies what a good ruler does in general.

Do me a favor, quote MY posts, exactly, with the words and sentences I used that gives you the idea I have any issue at all with the way Littlefinger got capped, by Arya, on Sansa's order.   Just one will do.

Thank you.

What makes you think Sansa as ruler would forget what death is?

I didn't missed the point I quoted you exactly, I removed nothing.

I think, you used a bad choice of words, and I'm leaving it at that.

[Bryce Lynch]

1 hour ago, Oscirus said:

Admittedly, Dany has made some great moves, problem is the stuff she did in between with this seat of her pants method. Hell, let's just look at Mereen. She took over freed the slaves and destabilized the economy so bad that their were people actually requesting to go back into slavery.  A terrorist organization rose on her watch and she damn there caused a riot. If anything, Mereen should prove that method doesn't work over the long haul.  So when I hear Dany talking about breaking the wheel and Tyrion seems to be working more on her  plan than she is, I start to worry. Is her rule just more of the same with her just being a gentler leader than the previous administrations?

No idea why people are hung up on Ned's method for executing people. Not every leader has to follow Ned's example to be effective. If anything, I tend to think that Sansa not doing that is more hints at her destiny not being in the North, so I was fine with that scene.

Any time a radical change, like abolishing slavery takes place, there is bound to be a temporary destabilizing of the economy.  She put measures in place, like barrack and soup kitchen to help the transition.  It seemed it was mainly, if not entirely the elderly who were having a problem, and when informed, she took measures to correct that problem.  I don't think it is fair to expect her to anticipate every possible problem and solve it before it happens.  Also, the problem with the elderly was probably created intentionally by the masters.  There was no reason the master couldn't have just kept the old tutor on as an employee or treated him like a family member.

I don't think you can blame Dany for a terrorist organization being formed by former masters looking to put people back into bondage.  As for the riot, she was trying to establish of policy of equal justice for all.  It was sort of a Stark-like decision to execute Mossador.  It was probably the morally right thing to do, but not the politically expedient thing.  I'm not sure she could have anticipated all the slaves she freed to turn on her so quickly over it, though.  

[Blonde Gator]

4 minutes ago, GrailKing said:

What makes you think Sansa as ruler would forget what death is?

I didn't missed the point I quoted you exactly, I removed nothing.

I think, you used a bad choice of words, and I'm leaving it at that.

I've asked you several times to USE MY OWN WORDS to show me where you've come up with some of your misinterpretations, and you refuse to do that, instead asking yet a different question that is totally non-related.  And here you go asking that^.    Facts not in evidence, counselor.

I'm out of this conversation, thank you very much. 

[Bryce Lynch]

7 minutes ago, stillshimpy said:

Shades of Todd Akin territory when talking about a "forcible rape".   Sex without consent is rape.  It doesn't matter if it is forcible or violent.  

Also, the use of the word "duty" is problematic because she was forced into a marriage by her captors.  Duty is similarly off the table. 

ETA: One of the weirder things that is set to happen for next season is that Sansa and Tryion will be on course to meet again.  

In the mythical culture, arranged marriages were common, so our real life modern standards don't really apply.

A person can consent to something, without really wanting to do it.  If a police officer pulls me over and wants to search my car, I might not want him to,  and I might have the right to refuse, but in some situations, I might consent just to get the stop over with faster and go on my way.  (Actually, I probably wouldn't but a lot of people would).  

People also might consent to things they would rather not do out a sense of duty or obligation, whether than duty or obligation is legally binding or not.  

Forcible rape is a legal term, used to describe rape that was done using physical force, violence or the threat of violence.  The term is in no way misogynist, quite the opposite.  It is a recognition that there does not necessarily need to be force or violence for a rape to take place

For whatever reason, whether a sense of duty, believing it was inevitable or whatever, Sansa appeared to signal that she was prepared to have intercourse with Tyrion and would not resist him or even tell him no.  You could argue that it would still be some form of rape (more by our modern standards that those of the world in the show) if Tyrion went through with it, but it would not have been forcible rape.  But, Tyrion did the honorable thing, disobeyed his father and refused to have sex with her until such time as she genuinely wanted to.  

[NeenerNeener]

14 hours ago, skiracing12 said:

I dont remember where but I remember reading a letter George RR wrote in the early '90's that explicitly said Jon, Dany, Arya, Bran, and Tyrion would survive the series. He also said something similar to the crew of Season 1. Does anyone have any reason that this might have changed? Or do we have to think of another way the ending will be bittersweet.

I just found this on a web site somewhere today. Martin himself has veered from his original pitch to his publisher. Sansa was supposed to marry Joffrey and give birth to his heir, Jon and Tyrion were both supposed to pine after Arya, and Daenerys was supposed to murder Drogo after he killed Viserys and find dragon eggs after she escapes from the Dothraki.

He also mentioned in the pitch that he doesn't really stick to an outline because he gets bored with a story if he knows how it's going to end, so he would rather just start writing and see where it takes him. That explains a lot about how this expanded from a proposed 3 books to 7, and why we may never see anything from him again after book 5.

Edited September 1, 2017 by NeenerNeener

[madam magpie]

28 minutes ago, stillshimpy said:

Shades of Todd Akin territory when talking about a "forcible rape".   Sex without consent is rape.  It doesn't matter if it is forcible or violent.  

Also, the use of the word "duty" is problematic because she was forced into a marriage by her captors.  Duty is similarly off the table. 

ETA: One of the weirder things that is set to happen for next season is that Sansa and Tryion will be on course to meet again.  

I'm kind of looking forward to that, actually! Didn't they part on good terms? (I mean...life was crap for both of them, but I don't think that was because of each other, right?)  I'd think Sansa would hold no animosity for Tyrion and would probably respect and admire him for how he treated her. 

4 minutes ago, Bryce Lynch said:

In the mythical culture, arranged marriages were common, so our real life modern standards don't really apply.

I've said this before and will say it again: What's different is the rigidity of the power structure, NOT how people feel. Women who are raped in societies that are ok with it aren't magically ok with being raped. They have no recourse or support. It's the same with slavery. 

Edited September 1, 2017 by madam magpie

[Bryce Lynch]

16 minutes ago, madam magpie said:

I'm kind of looking forward to that, actually! Didn't they part on good terms? (I mean...life was crap for both of them, but I don't think that was because of each other, right?)  I'd think Sansa would hold no animosity for Tyrion and would probably respect and admire him for how he treated her. 

I agree.  I think Sansa thinks highly of Tyrion.  He was always kind to her, even before their forced marriage.  He defended her from Joffrey on more than one occasion (most notably when Trant was beating her in the throne room) and sent The Hound to rescue her when the mob was trying to rape and murder her.  

After the marriage, he respected that she did not want to consummate it and made no effort to do so.  They also began to enjoy each other's company.  There was a scene where they were laughing together in the garden, as they plotted to get even with those who mocked them.   At the Purple Wedding, when she picked up Joffrey's cup, after he had kicked it away from Tyrion, I think that was a sign her caring for and respecting Tyrion.  

In Episode 703 she told Jon that Tyrion was not like the other Lannisters and was always kind to her. 

I don't expect it, but I wouldn't be totally shocked if those two renewed their wedding vows.  

Edited September 1, 2017 by Bryce Lynch

[Bryce Lynch]

17 minutes ago, madam magpie said:

I'm kind of looking forward to that, actually! Didn't they part on good terms? (I mean...life was crap for both of them, but I don't think that was because of each other, right?)  I'd think Sansa would hold no animosity for Tyrion and would probably respect and admire him for how he treated her. 

I've said this before and will say it again: What's different is the rigidity of the power structure, NOT how people feel. Women who are raped in societies that are ok with it aren't magically ok with being raped. They have no recourse or support. It's the same with slavery. 

A woman in Westeros or say in medieval Europe, who was part of an arranged political marriage might not see having sex with the husband she was forced or pressured into marrying as "rape".  She might just feel it was her lot in life.  A woman who was raised being told, she will marrying the man her parents choose and will give him babies, is not necessarily going to see things the same way a modern woman would.  

 I think Sansa probably would have seen herself as performing a very unpleasant duty.   Thankfully, Tyrion spared her from that. 

[madam magpie]

1 hour ago, Bryce Lynch said:

A woman in Westeros or say in medieval Europe, who was part of an arranged political marriage might not see having sex with the husband she was forced or pressured into marrying as "rape".  She might just feel it was her lot in life.  A woman who was raised being told, she will marrying the man her parents choose and will give him babies, is not necessarily going to see things the same way a modern woman would.  

 I think Sansa probably would have seen herself as performing a very unpleasant duty.   Thankfully, Tyrion spared her from that. 

I think it was obvious Sansa was young, scared, and afraid she was about to be raped. Tyrion isn't heroic in that moment because he doesn't have sex with someone who's not into him. I don't admire him for that. He's heroic because, unlike many of the people in power in this world, he sees Sansa for what she is: young, abused, scared, powerless, etc. Even if she's quiet about it. And he refuses to accept the demands of the power structure. The scale is smaller, of course, but he gives Sansa a moment of freedom there the same way Dany has been freeing people. Storywise, it speaks to the better world they're both trying to create.

Edited September 1, 2017 by madam magpie

[Macbeth]

1 hour ago, NeenerNeener said:

I just found this on a web site somewhere today. Martin himself has veered from his original pitch to his publisher. Sansa was supposed to marry Joffrey and give birth to his heir, Jon and Tyrion were both supposed to pine after Arya, and Daenerys was supposed to murder Drogo after he killed Viserys and find dragon eggs after she escapes from the Dothraki.

He also mentioned in the pitch that he doesn't really stick to an outline because he gets bored with a story if he knows how it's going to end, so he would rather just start writing and see where it takes him. That explains a lot about how this expanded from a proposed 3 books to 7, and why we may never see anything from him again after book 5.

That explains everything.  I am really glad I didn't know about the books until after the show started to air. By the time I read the books it was clear the show was going to leave the books in their dust.

[Bryce Lynch]

28 minutes ago, doram said:

Mossador didn't happen in the books. Dany feeding masters to her dragons didn't happen in the books.

Similarly, Jon's threat to kill Baby Sam if Gilly didn't leave with Nance's baby was scrapped. Tyriom becoming the lowest of the low post-patricide was also scrapped.

Conversely, Tyrion of the 'I'd like to join up with Dany so she can help me rape and kill my sister' is now referred to as the most moral person on the show who counterbalances Dany's ruthless borderline 'cray-cray' while Jon is the noble idiot who needs to be surrounded and rescued by craftier 'players' like Sansa.

There's a pattern here of the show 'demonising' their female hero while 'canonising' their male heroes.

I haven't read the books, so I can't make a comparison.  But I see Dany as a hero.  She isn't perfect, but she is probably overall the most admirable character on the show.  If she was any better, she would probably seem unrealistically perfect to me.

For the record, I approved of Dany beheading Mossador.  Tough choice, but she wanted to have one standard of justice for all.  I was mad at all the slaves she had freed who worshiped her as "Mhysa" and then viciously turned on her.  I also approved of her feeding the Masters to her dragons and crucifying the 163 Masters after they had crucified the same number of slave children.  

As for cleaning up Jon and Tyrion, that might be more a case of the show needing a least a few more likable characters.  

I'm not sure Tyrion is seen as the most moral person on the show or more moral than Dany.  I see him being written as a politician who might be needed to compliment Dany's more brash, warrior style.  That said, Tyrion's track record for his advice and decisions, since joining Team Dany, has been spotty.  

[stillshimpy]

2 hours ago, Bryce Lynch said:

In the mythical culture, arranged marriages were common, so our real life modern standards don't really apply.

A person can consent to something, without really wanting to do it.  If a police officer pulls me over and wants to search my car, I might not want him to,  and I might have the right to refuse, but in some situations, I might consent just to get the stop over with faster and go on my way.  (Actually, I probably wouldn't but a lot of people would).  

 

I don't agree with this even a little and furthermore, neither does the story itself.  For one thing, this was not produced for a mythic land, it was produced to be consumed by people in this world and will be received by those standards.  In the story, the actual story, Tyrion is aware that consummating the marriage would rape (as says Tywin) so the story doesn't even support that point of view. 

Again, they're on a collision course for next season, so I'm sure the subject itself will be addressed within the story. 

Edited September 1, 2017 by stillshimpy

[WindyNights]

2 hours ago, Bryce Lynch said:

In the mythical culture, arranged marriages were common, so our real life modern standards don't really apply.

A person can consent to something, without really wanting to do it.  If a police officer pulls me over and wants to search my car, I might not want him to,  and I might have the right to refuse, but in some situations, I might consent just to get the stop over with faster and go on my way.  (Actually, I probably wouldn't but a lot of people would).  

People also might consent to things they would rather not do out a sense of duty or obligation, whether than duty or obligation is legally binding or not.  

Forcible rape is a legal term, used to describe rape that was done using physical force, violence or the threat of violence.  The term is in no way misogynist, quite the opposite.  It is a recognition that there does not necessarily need to be force or violence for a rape to take place

For whatever reason, whether a sense of duty, believing it was inevitable or whatever, Sansa appeared to signal that she was prepared to have intercourse with Tyrion and would not resist him or even tell him no.  You could argue that it would still be some form of rape (more by our modern standards that those of the world in the show) if Tyrion went through with it, but it would not have been forcible rape.  But, Tyrion did the honorable thing, disobeyed his father and refused to have sex with her until such time as she genuinely wanted to.  

It really wasn't honorable. 

 

He was just trying to be a skeevy "nice guy". He wanted to win her over with his kindness because he was so starved for affection.  When she says never, he feels like he just got slapped in the face instead of winning points with her, he's facing the possibility that nothing will get her to love him.

 

Afterwards during the Joffrey's wedding, he thinks about claiming his rights. I think he was going to eventually break his word maybe not soon but eventually.

[madam magpie]

I find it impossible to believe anyone could get Dany to help them rape anyone, even Cersei. There's no way Dany would allow that. Is that really in the book or an exaggeration?? (I haven't read the books either.)

Given what we've seen on the show, I'd say Dany, Jon, Tyrion, Sansa, and Arya are all heroic. They're all very, very flawed, but they're doing the best they can to improve the world around them and help people who are less powerful than they are. I'd consider them moral. There are several heroic minor characters too, like Brienne, Jorah, and Sam.

[stillshimpy]

2 hours ago, madam magpie said:

I'm kind of looking forward to that, actually! Didn't they part on good terms? (I mean...life was crap for both of them, but I don't think that was because of each other, right?)  I'd think Sansa would hold no animosity for Tyrion and would probably respect and admire him for how he treated her. 

I'm looking forward to it too and I don't expect them to dance around the subject.  The one nice thing about the excessive fanservice of this season is it seems the writers are out to answer longterm fan questions.  They already had Tyrion go right up to that edge by going out of his way to make sure Jon knew the marriage hadn't been consummated "of course" (implications, implications of knowing it would be wrong to do so). 

Then also Arya's conversation with Sansa where they both acknowledged what the other had been through seemed another area where the fanservice machine was set to "settling debates" once and for all. 

[Blonde Gator]

55 minutes ago, stillshimpy said:

I'm looking forward to it too and I don't expect them to dance around the subject.  The one nice thing about the excessive fanservice of this season is it seems the writers are out to answer longterm fan questions.  They already had Tyrion go right up to that edge by going out of his way to make sure Jon knew the marriage hadn't been consummated "of course" (implications, implications of knowing it would be wrong to do so). 

Then also Arya's conversation with Sansa where they both acknowledged what the other had been through seemed another area where the fanservice machine was set to "settling debates" once and for all. 

I'm willing to bet Tyrion introduces Sansa to Daenerys as "my Lady Wife, Sansa", although he might go so far to say "my former Lady Wife, Sansa".  It's going to be great if that happens. 

Something that the show has kind of downplayed lately, is that Tyrion was always a man whore in the early season, brothels, brothels, tits and wine, and so forth.  But after he married Sansa, and was spurned by her, once he fled Westeros, he DID go to a whorehouse, but backed away when the Dany-looking prostitute approached him.  He's had plenty of time to think about his former actions, and I believe he's come to the conclusion that Sansa represented a "proper wife" for him, as the (hoped-to-be) heir of a Great House.  I think that particular thought has been in the back of his mind, although the show has never explicitly had him either say it, or show us that he believes it.  But the show hasn't presented him another 'opportunity' to pursue his former passion of tits & wine, since the bridge city on Volantis.   He seems to have let that aspect of his life go.

And in reflection, here's hoping that Sansa, too, sees Tyrion's value, maybe going so far as husband material.  A man who is smart, and was very kind to her when it cost him to do so.  He's really the first adult who ever respected her, and was sympathetic to her feelings, for who she was.  I don't think there was any love in that relationship, but there was definitely the beginnings of friendship, and their respect for each other has never been diminished.  Here's hoping............

Edited September 1, 2017 by Blonde Gator

[GraceK]

I'm not sure how popular this opinion is, but I'm actually glad the show changed Tyrions book arc. I love Peter Dinklage and I love what he has done with the role...book Tyrion took a very ugly turn :( I love his relationship with Sansa in the show...he was so respectful and really gave a crap about how scared and alone she was. He really seemed sincere about being her friend. JMO 

[AshleyN]

6 hours ago, stillshimpy said:

That's true, but Ned couldn't have known that Jon would grow up to look like a Stark when he was a baby and the most obvious thing to do from there (I did say someone known for spreading it around, after all) would be Brandon who would have had it coming.  

But mostly, I don't think anyone would have paid all that much attention to who the butcher's kid was looking like if the cover story was that it was the child of a fallen soldier because all Ned would have to say is, "He favors his father's side" so it's a pretty plausible cover story.  Ned stuck as close to the truth as possible, "He's a family member" and chose the rather odd route of preserving Catelyn's view of Brandon in death rather than his own intact honor in life.  

Ned choosing to take a hit to his own honour rather than slander his dead (aka horrifically murdered) brother doesn't seem odd to me at all? I think it would have been wildly out of character for him to have done what you're suggesting.

6 hours ago, screamin said:

Ned wasn't anti-child death enough not to take Theon with the proviso that he would kill him if his father staged an uprising. I think even GRRM said once that Ned would have. It's a bannerman's duty, and it's the by-the-book thing to do to a hostage in case of uprising. And Ned is nothing if not bound to duty by the book. Of course, if actually FACED with the prospect of killing Theon, he might have blanched at it.  He wasn't anti-child death enough to refuse to continue as Robert's hand when he ordered the assassination of pregnant Dany (who was, what, fourteen?) It was only when actually faced with precipitating the killing of children he knew himself (Tommen, Myrcella, and Joffrey) that he realized he could not face the responsibility of doing things he was duty bound to do by the book...and because he was so conflicted about it, he mismanaged it completely.

He wasn't bound to duty by the book when he lied to Robert and sheltered the heir to the throne in Winterfell for years (an act of treason). He wasn't bound to duty by the book when, as you said, he gave Cersei a chance to escape due to his fear of what Robert would do to her children (another act of treason). He wasn't bound to duty by the book when he falsely confessed to treason and pronounced Joffrey the true heir to the throne basically the moment Sansa's safety was dangled in front of him. And as has been pointed out, he did resign as Robert's hand when he ordered Dany's assassination. Robert basically forced it back onto him when he was laid up in bed after his fight with Jaime, and even there I got the impression that he wasn't planning to hang around for long. He was also furious about what happened to Rhaegar's children and at Robert for not punishing those involved and left the capital almost immediately afterwards. I believe he states in the books that it was only their shared grief over Lyanna's death that allowed them to reconcile.

When I think of characters who operate "by the book" I think of Stannis. Ned was bound more to his own moral code than the letter of the law, and while he clearly had a blind spot when it came to Robert (somewhat understandable I think, given their history) I think there's an argument to be made that his reluctance to see children punished for the crimes of their parents is his single most important character trait.

Edited September 2, 2017 by AshleyN

[madam magpie]

23 minutes ago, doram said:

Nope. It's not an exaggeration. Tyron hasn't met Dany in the books, for what it's worth. 

Ah, I see. I'm with @GraceK. I like the show Tyrion a lot better!

[GrailKing]

On 8/29/2017 at 8:30 AM, Haleth said:

That was fun!  Great to see the various actors hanging out and chatting.  It must have been a blast to film this giant "family reunion."  I was surprised to see that the wiggling severed arm of the wight was actually attached to a stunt actor in green.  I had just assumed the arm was mechanical.

My 2c on the incest?  Meh, it's a fantasy world with fantasy values.  Jon and Dany might be squicked out at first, but those kids are meant for each other.  I really, really want to see how other characters react to the news that Jon is a Targ.  I want to see Varys's jaw drop.

I want to see what they think about Ned Stark, pulling one on them, especially if most of the warring houses are extinct or close to it.  

[GrailKing]

On 8/29/2017 at 9:40 AM, screamin said:

Funny thing, she DID in the episode - from LF.   :P

"Would mean more coming from Sansa and Arya, not hard changing "Him " to "Them"

We should throw tomatoes at the writers for that omission. 

[anamika]

6 hours ago, doram said:

Mossador didn't happen in the books. Dany feeding masters to her dragons didn't happen in the books.

Similarly, Jon's threat to kill Baby Sam if Gilly didn't leave with Nance's baby was scrapped. Tyriom becoming the lowest of the low post-patricide was also scrapped.

Conversely, Tyrion of the 'I'd like to join up with Dany so she can help me rape and kill my sister' is now referred to as the most moral person on the show who counterbalances Dany's ruthless borderline 'cray-cray' while Jon is the noble idiot who needs to be surrounded and rescued by craftier 'players' like Sansa.

There's a pattern here of the show 'demonising' their female hero while 'canonising' their male heroes.

I don't think it's as simple as that. The show just lacks the ability to write their characters and story arcs with nuance so they just box them into one-dimensional tropes - brave warrior, politician, warg, assassin, queen etc.

In fact, the show also whitewashes it's female characters. A lot of the actions that get them the most criticism in the books is absent on the show.

Catelyn gets a lot of hate for telling Jon - 'It should have been you'. Wishing that it was Jon dying instead of Bran. That was missing on the show and we have Cat thinking that her family misfortunes are because she could not love Jon.

One of Dany's actions in the books that gets a lot of criticism and something that cannot be defended is her agreeing to the torture of the Wineseller's daughters - missing on the show.

Sansa's worst act was betraying her family and tattling to Cersei - that was responsible for Ned's execution, Arya going on the run and Jeyne Poole getting stuck with LF. Arya has real reasons for being pissed at Sansa - as GRRM mentioned they have real issues to sort out when they meet again. But since Sansa's betrayal was absent on the show, Arya and Sansa had to fight over that stupid letter.

Arya actually kills the insurance man on the FM's say so in the books. On the show, she decides not to kill Lady Crane and does not kill the insurance man.

In the books, Cersei murders Robert's bastard babies. On the show Joffrey does it.

In fact I think the writers hesitation to commit to character arcs is because they don't want these characters to get hate. The prime example being Sansa. David and Dan have come out and said that they don't like that Sansa gets hate. It's why their take on Sansa is so wishy washy and why she is so inconsistently written. This is a character created by GRRM to create conflict among the Starks and you can see that the showrunners want to go there from all their interviews and script outlines where they want to write her as some Machiavellian schemer who is constantly considering screwing over her family, but it never comes across on screen. Even with the Battle of the Bastards, her not telling Jon about the Knights of the Vale is a plothole than a deliberate scheme and is shrugged off with an apology and a kiss. In this season, the script mentions in every scene that she wants to rule over the North instead of Jon, Arya recognizes this and that's what fuels their feud. But they don't seem to want to commit to it.

I mean all the issues that Arya had with Sansa - her wanting to rule instead of Jon, her not supporting Jon against the Northern Lords, her always wanting nice things - those issues still remain even if LF is dead. But I am sure none of that will be mentioned next season.

And it also shows how ham-handed the show is when it writes these issues. Sure Arya and Sansa are going to have serious issues to deal with and I am definite that's it not going to be all hugs and cuddles when they meet. They never got along and I doubt that they ever fully will even in the future. But it's hilarious how that show just took that conflict and dialed it up to 10 and had them trying to kill each other!!

As for Dany and Jon. I had no troubles with how the show handled Dany's time in Meereen. Dany does give into her rage sometimes when her people are hurt (In the books she had the wineseller's daughters tortured for information, on the show she burned the actual slavers) and she often regrets it and experiences doubt after the deed. In the books, I disagreed with her refusal to punish some of her men for wrong actions against slaver families, telling them that you reap what you sow when they asked for justice. Rather, I agreed with her decision to punish Mossador on the show. 

All things considered, Dany still got a chance to rule over Meereen on the show and make some tough decisions. Compared to Jon's entire ADwD arc being absent on the show and given off to Sansa to demonstrate how she's this bad-ass super queen. GRRM specifically mentions how Dany's Meereen arc and Jon's Wall arc in ADwD was to have them grow as leaders and learn to rule. And the show just removed that whole part of Jon's story, reduced him to muscle and handed off his book story to Sansa to give her character something to do.

Anyways, I have to say that I am satisfied with Jon and Dany's arcs this season. I think they made the right decisions for the most part and were good leaders and I would have no issues with either of them ruling/leading the kingdoms at this point.

Edited September 2, 2017 by anamika

[GrailKing]

On 8/29/2017 at 0:29 PM, Blonde Gator said:

There are only a couple of people who know about wildfire at this point.  Cersei, Qyburn, and Tyrion.  Am I missing anyone else (besides the pyromancers)?

 

I saw someone say the Hound, and Jorah(?can't remember how he know)

But also Davos, and Bronn and I'm sure more have a notion with the Sept blowing up.

I wouldn't be surprised Jamie remembers it from the mad king or heard from Bronn or someone about Blackwater.

ETA: Point Bran to the proper file cabinet.

Edited September 2, 2017 by GrailKing

[WindyNights]

4 hours ago, madam magpie said:

I find it impossible to believe anyone could get Dany to help them rape anyone, even Cersei. There's no way Dany would allow that. Is that really in the book or an exaggeration?? (I haven't read the books either.)

Given what we've seen on the show, I'd say Dany, Jon, Tyrion, Sansa, and Arya are all heroic. They're all very, very flawed, but they're doing the best they can to improve the world around them and help people who are less powerful than they are. I'd consider them moral. There are several heroic minor characters too, like Brienne, Jorah, and Sam.

In the books, Tyrion is a straight villain with empathetic moments. He doesn't start that way but he breaks after Tywin's death. He wants revenge on all of Westeros and states repeatedly that he wants to rape Cersei to get back at her. Even the author calls him a villain.

Book Daenerys can edge pretty close to villain sometimes. Like when she tortures a man's daughter in front of him to get answers or when she has her Unsullied massacres 13 year old boys part of the slave master caste. I don't think she'd have anyone raped but I do think her Dothraki are probably conducting inumerable amounts of rapes across the countryside.

 

That said, in comparison to Tyrion, Daenerys is close to her book counterpart. Tyrion (and Jon) are massively white-washed.

[madam magpie]

43 minutes ago, WindyNights said:

Book Daenerys can edge pretty close to villain sometimes. Like when she tortures a man's daughter in front of him to get answers or when she has her Unsullied massacres 13 year old boys part of the slave master caste. I don't think she'd have anyone raped but I do think her Dothraki are probably conducting inumerable amounts of rapes across the countryside.

I hope not. I mean, the queen can't control the individual behavior of every soldier, but I'd hope she'd try to eradicate that part of the Dothraki culture. I have to say, these insights don't inspire me to want to read the books... ?

26 minutes ago, doram said:

Dany didn't massacre any 13 year old boys in the books. And she had rapists castrated so I don't know how anyone can conclude that her Dothraki we're raping people under her watch. 

That's more like it!

Edited September 2, 2017 by madam magpie

[GrailKing]

On 8/29/2017 at 0:34 AM, rmontro said:

Not to follow Cersei, to protect his unborn nephew/niece.  He did say that he loved Cersei's other children (although Joffrey would be a stretch).  He was obviously concerned when he realized she was pregnant.  Besides, he had just got done telling Jon Snow it wouldn't hurt to lie once in a while.  He obviously cares for his family.  Not only that, every one of his military suggestions ended unsuccessfully.

Watch, he betray Danny for love of a future niece or nephew only to find out Cersei has a tumor growing.

[WindyNights]

1 hour ago, doram said:

Dany didn't massacre any 13 year old boys in the books. And she had rapists castrated so I don't know how anyone can conclude that her Dothraki we're raping people under her watch. 

She did at Astapor but it's implicit rather than explicit.

 

Here:

"Unsullied!" Dany galloped before them, her silver-gold braid flying behind her, her bell chiming with every stride. "Slay the Good Masters, slay the soldiers, slay every man who wears a tokar or holds a whip, but harm no child under twelve, and strike the chains off every slave you see." She raised the harpy's fingers in the air . . . and then she flung the scourge aside. "Freedom!" she sang out. "Dracarys! Dracarys!"

 

 

Daenerys can't stop people from raping. She can only punish them if they do. People aren't puppets. Even Robb Stark's men did a bit of raping. 

Edited September 2, 2017 by WindyNights

[WindyNights]

1 hour ago, madam magpie said:

I hope not. I mean, the queen can't control the individual behavior of every soldier, but I'd hope she'd try to eradicate that part of the Dothraki culture. I have to say, these insights don't inspire me to want to read the books... ?

I mean that's not something she's capable of. Culture change is a slow process. That's something the books explore and the show touches on. There's no magic button to force people to think as you do not even with all the power in the world. 

Even in the show when Yara gets captured her men try to go back to raping and looting. 

 

Related to that is GRRM's comments on  dragons being nukes:

 

“Dragons are the nuclear deterrent, and only [Daenerys Targaryen, one of the series’ heroines] has them, which in some ways makes her the most powerful person in the world,” Martin said in 2011. “But is that sufficient? These are the kind of issues I’m trying to explore. The United States right now has the ability to destroy the world with our nuclear arsenal, but that doesn’t mean we can achieve specific geopolitical goals. Power is more subtle than that. You can have the power to destroy, but it doesn’t give you the power to reform, or improve, or build.”

 

Strength can only get you so far. 

 

On the books, don't worry. Not everyone is darker. Some major characters are worse people and some major characters are better people. And there's a lot of humor and lightness to break up the grimness.

Edited September 2, 2017 by WindyNights

[Oscirus]

5 hours ago, Blonde Gator said:

I'm willing to bet Tyrion introduces Sansa to Daenerys as "my Lady Wife, Sansa", although he might go so far to say "my former Lady Wife, Sansa".  It's going to be great if that happens. 

Something that the show has kind of downplayed lately, is that Tyrion was always a man whore in the early season, brothels, brothels, tits and wine, and so forth.  But after he married Sansa, and was spurned by her, once he fled Westeros, he DID go to a whorehouse, but backed away when the Dany-looking prostitute approached him.  He's had plenty of time to think about his former actions, and I believe he's come to the conclusion that Sansa represented a "proper wife" for him, as the (hoped-to-be) heir of a Great House.  I think that particular thought has been in the back of his mind, although the show has never explicitly had him either say it, or show us that he believes it.  But the show hasn't presented him another 'opportunity' to pursue his former passion of tits & wine, since the bridge city on Volantis.   He seems to have let that aspect of his life go.

And in reflection, here's hoping that Sansa, too, sees Tyrion's value, maybe going so far as husband material.  A man who is smart, and was very kind to her when it cost him to do so.  He's really the first adult who ever respected her, and was sympathetic to her feelings, for who she was.  I don't think there was any love in that relationship, but there was definitely the beginnings of friendship, and their respect for each other has never been diminished.  Here's hoping............

I don't think Tyrion will do any such thing. He might joke around with her about it, but that's likely as far as they'll go in terms of addressing the marriage. If it becomes politically prudent for them to acknowledge the marriage, then they'll do so(which is what I think will happen), if not, they'll move on. 

[madam magpie]

7 minutes ago, WindyNights said:

I mean that's not something she's capable of. Culture change is a slow process. That's something the books explore and the show touches on. There's no magic button to force people to think as you do not even with all the power in the world. 

Sure, but if she's castrating rapists, she's already trying to change the culture. Like I said, no queen (or commander-in-chief or secretary of defense or even general, etc.) can control the behavior of every single soldier. What the people in power can do is set the rules, boundaries, and tone, and impose consequences for violating the rules. Sounds like that's what she's doing...and it's exactly what I'd expect her to do given how her character has been portrayed.

The main reason I don't read the books, honestly, is that they're so detailed and have so many characters. I can barely (and even not always then) keep the show straight. I mostly listen to books on Audible and I know there's NO WAY I'd be able to remember what's going on. But I am interested in how the books progress and how the detail in them can be used to better understand the story being told on the show.

[GrailKing]

On 8/29/2017 at 6:57 PM, iMonrey said:

What this tells me is that even the director isn't sure what was going on and had to make his own interpretations.

It tells me he had a better handle on it then IHW, the only thing that makes sense is :1 Sansa did figure out LF plan with Brienne, so she sent her away, banking on trusting Arya. 2 Arya's vitriol towards Sansa, did not help in anyway and it confirms to me that all those words between the sisters was as real as the threat from the North, just closer to home. 3. when was Bran seen, to me it came to a head in Arya's room Sansa may have been looking for the scroll, but the bag of faces did it, at this point she rightly felt afraid, and rightly pushed about Arya's faces, instead of playing the game, Arya had to believe Sansa, as she gave her the dagger and turned her back to leave ( you don't do that to someone you don't trust or believe ), at that point Sansa may have felt she could trust Arya, but her faces and words still shook her.

It's here that Sansa ( alone or with Arya ) went to see Bran and got the dagger back to Arya , and they can ask questions, and compare notes, and it's here they came up with the plan for his execution. I do think if they wanted us to freak out more, they have Arya come in defenseless and only wearing a smock or wool gown. 

The part where LF is giving his last lesson and his Q & A with Sansa, that was a ruse; it fits continuity wise, it fits with what Sansa knows of Arya ( not a lady ), what she knows of LF (the forced written letter, framing her and Tyrion for killing Joffery, Killing Lysa, selling her to the Boltons, add in Arya seeing him with Tywin, and all the things Bran saw that they didn't know).

So when we see Sansa on the wall of Winterfell, it wasn't to judge Arya, it was to judge LF, and it's her actual first time sentencing someone to death where she is in a position of power, and she as Regent for Jon, needs to get it right or they could loose the Vale. 

Add to it her emotional conflicts with the guy who taught her things (that in honesty should have been touched on by Cat and Ned not to the extent that LF did )saved her at least once from certain death; but also had a creepy love angle to it like a kidnapped person to their captor and we can see her mind sorting it out like a buzz saw.

Arya's asking those questions, nudges and reassures Sansa that she can do it.

End of one drama, next one is sailing in to White Harbor in the future.

[WindyNights]

40 minutes ago, madam magpie said:

Sure, but if she's castrating rapists, she's already trying to change the culture. Like I said, no queen (or commander-in-chief or secretary of defense or even general, etc.) can control the behavior of every single soldier. What the people in power can do is set the rules, boundaries, and tone, and impose consequences for violating the rules. Sounds like that's what she's doing...and it's exactly what I'd expect her to do given how her character has been portrayed.

The main reason I don't read the books, honestly, is that they're so detailed and have so many characters. I can barely (and even not always then) keep the show straight. I mostly listen to books on Audible and I know there's NO WAY I'd be able to remember what's going on. But I am interested in how the books progress and how the detail in them can be used to better understand the story being told on the show.

Fair enough. That's consistent with both versions of Daenerys.

 

Believe me, it's easier remembering characters in books than in shows. That's mainly because any time a character talks in a book you see their name. Characters on shows don't come with identifications every scene. And it's very easy to confuse show characters between each other because everyone looks so similar. Podrick and Gendry, for example.

But since you listen to books on audio, I'm not sure if it would be as easy as just reading it. Names get imprinted in your head every time you have to read Gendry said or Edmure said or Jaime said etc.

 

Personally, I think you'd have an easier time with the books seeing as you watched the show already but if you ever do read it, keep in mind that the first book would probably end up being the most boring to you since the first season was a very close adaptation of the book.

Edited September 2, 2017 by WindyNights

[GrailKing]

On 8/29/2017 at 8:07 PM, taurusrose said:

I think the kind of man Jon is and all that he has accomplished speak for themselves. He is a child of the north and Stark blood runs through his veins. I think the tension is going to stem from the fact that Jon is a royal heir, has a better claim to the IT than Dany, and is way above Sansa in station. (That last part gives me a happy because she thinks highly of her pedigree and what a joke that her bastard half-brother is really her royal first cousin.)

Assuming that it doesn't screw the Northern alliance, I don't think it would affect Sansa much at all. No matter Jon's station, Sansa is the Lady of Winterfell by right of birth as Ned's oldest daughter, and if Jon moves ( or doesn't move ) his seat she still would become Regent or Wardeness of the North.

As LF told her a marriage would be a proper course and understandable, this would also make House Stark in line for the throne after Jon's children, and if She has children they also be in line, followed by Arya, the only one who can take Winterfell from her legally is Bran, and he doesn't want it.

[madam magpie]

13 minutes ago, WindyNights said:

Fair enough. That's consistent with both versions of Daenerys.

 

Believe me, it's easier remembering characters in books than in shows. That's mainly because any time a character talks in a book you see their name. Characters on shows don't come with identifications every scene. And it's very easy to confuse show characters between each other because everyone looks so similar. Podrick and Gendry, for example.

But since you listen to books on audio, I'm not sure if it would be as easy as just reading it. Names get imprinted in your head every time you have to read Gendry said or Edmure said or Jaime said etc.

 

Personally, I think you'd have an easier time with the books seeing as you watched the show already but if you ever do read it, keep in mind that the first book would probably end up being the most boring to you since the first season was a very close adaptation of the book.

The first season was also my least favorite, so...that's probably an accurate observation. I actually think this season is my favorite of them all so far. I've really liked the pacing, though I do think they've gone too quickly a handful of times. (This Arya/Sansa/Littlefinger thing needed a bit more time.)  But I'm currently rewatching so that could change.

I work in publishing and read all day, which is why I prefer audio books for fun. I just can't read anymore when I get home. It is true, though, that reading names often makes it easier to retain them, but I also read Lord of the Rings years ago and could not for the life of me keep track of who was who, so...

Edited September 2, 2017 by madam magpie

[Blonde Gator]

7 minutes ago, GrailKing said:

Assuming that it doesn't screw the Northern alliance, I don't think it would affect Sansa much at all. No matter Jon's station, Sansa is the Lady of Winterfell by right of birth as Ned's oldest daughter, and if Jon moves ( or doesn't move ) his seat she still would become Regent or Wardeness of the North.

As LF told her a marriage would be a proper course and understandable, this would also make House Stark in line for the throne after Jon's children, and if She has children they also be in line, followed by Arya, the only one who can take Winterfell from her legally is Bran, and he doesn't want it.

Do you understand what the title "Warden" means in relation to titles in Westeros?

[GrailKing]

26 minutes ago, Blonde Gator said:

Do you understand what the title "Warden" means in relation to titles in Westeros?

It means running a portion of the country under power of the king, it means collect taxes, and provide income to such king etc.to answer the kings needs etc.

I,m sure there's more.

[Blonde Gator]

3 minutes ago, GrailKing said:

It means running a portion of the country under power of the king, it means collect taxes, and provide income to such king etc.to answer the kings needs etc.

I,m sure there's more.

Actually, it means the supreme military leader of a region, as sort of a surrogate for the monarch in that regard.

The administrative type duties fall to the Lord Paramount of the region, which is often the same as the Warden, but not always.  The Warden is a titled bestowed by the monarch, but the monarch removes the right to bestow it upon whomever he chooses, whereas the Lord Paramount title is hereditary.

[GrailKing]

On 8/29/2017 at 10:34 PM, mac123x said:

From that interview with the director:

 

 

Thanks for clearing that up, said no one.  Really?  The fucking director doesn't know?  How was he able to provide direction to the actors?  I guess he didn't, because I rewatched the Sansa / Littlefinger scene from this episode and Sophie Turner gave no hint, verbal or non-verbal, that she was on to him. 

 

The only thing I could retroactively call Sansa's "aha" moment was when Petyr asked her what Sansa's death would get Arya.  She briefly made eye contact with him when she said "Lady of Winterfell".  Maybe that was her "aha, he's fucking with us" realization, but it just as easily could be interpreted as "aha, that's what Arya wants!" stupidity.

Nah, to me that's her playing, continuity wise, it make sense to see Bran after that bedroom scene , not later, if they had phone service she be calling 911( Bran ) at that moment saying her sister is nut's she threaten me with a knife and peel my face!

She wouldn't be seeing a quack, who sold her to a rapist and child killer, and murdered her Aunt in front of her eyes.

[GrailKing]

8 minutes ago, Blonde Gator said:

Actually, it means the supreme military leader of a region, as sort of a surrogate for the monarch in that regard.

The administrative type duties fall to the Lord Paramount of the region, which is often the same as the Warden, but not always.  The Warden is a titled bestowed by the monarch, but the monarch removes the right to bestow it upon whomever he chooses, whereas the Lord Paramount title is hereditary.

I'm sure Sansa wouldn't mind the rest, he can give wardenship to anyone, he have to usurp her to take Winterfell, seeing that she actually running that land well do you really think he trust someone else, especially that they are family ?

[GrailKing]

On 8/29/2017 at 11:31 PM, Blonde Gator said:

How does Jorah know about the Wildfire in King's Landing?  He's been exiled in Essos for years and years before (show) returning to the Citadel.

I'm  thinking they meant Bronn .

On 8/29/2017 at 11:40 PM, Blonde Gator said:

Tyrion actually talked to the pyromancers in Season 2, the "Harrenhall" episode.   He instructed them to make more wildfire.  It wasn't just a store of old wildfire.  I don't know why the pyromancers wouldn't still be there, merrily making more and more, that is their one an donly job.  I am sure Qyburn knows about the wildfire and the pyromancers, he is Cersei's Hand, and who else would have set up the explosion in the Sept last season?  Tyrion knows Qyburn knows, how could the new hand not know what the old Hand knows?

Tyrion's problem is that he doesn't have any pyromancers.  The only ones he knows about are in the Red Keep, if they're still alive.  But it's a Valyrian art, and there are plenty of remnants of the Valyrian empire....if he only asks the question of the right person...."where can I get wildfire?".

Hell Sam may have the damn recipe in one of those books.

North has Watson/ google/Branhattan and Sam who can follow written directions.

[GrailKing]

On 8/30/2017 at 3:26 AM, anamika said:

As it stands show Sansa would make a terrible ruler. The only thing she did this season was grumble to LF about grain, tell a soldier how to fit armor with leather, want children punished for the actions of their parents, fall for LF's lies and manipulations, argue constantly with Jon, disagree with everything Jon says, undermine Jon in front of the houses, brag about unearned victories while dismissing the efforts of others, send Brienne off to isolate Arya and make sure that she has the support of the Northern houses to become QITN in case Jon fails in his efforts or dies.

Never talked to LF about grain, it was between her and Wolcum and she understood, there's not enough for the impending refugees to come and she set a wise plan to offset that, she never talked to a soldier or armorer as Lady and Regent and as a northerner she knew it was the wrong type of armor for that area in winter, she asked if she was correct and Lord Royce questioned the armorer. She argues twice and they both had valid points of views she gave sage advice and he was condescending and autocratic ( even in the last episode ), she didn't dismiss anyone, she tells us more then once the vale, the Mormonts, the Hornwoods and the Masins help get Winterfell back. If she fell for LF lies or manipulations, she could have pressed her claims, she didn't ;a point clearly shown to piss LF off .

She understood the game he presented about Brienne; and his plan was to use Brienne to further his game, it was a smart move and a risk on her part. Yes she listens and she picks the lessons that helps her agenda not his: " everything happening you seen before etc." yup she did Her father's honor got him killed, her brothers broken vows got him killed, Brienne's vows and honor could get Brienne and Arya killed, yeah she fixed that ,moved the chess piece to KL, one less person he can use. 

[GrailKing]

On 8/30/2017 at 7:38 AM, doram said:

Thanks for this. 

We're constantly shown Sansa acting snobbish and pulling rank on people. She even does it in King's Landing to Shae. 

Even when she and Jon are "working together" (and I use that term loosely) to reclaim Winterfell, there's a certain degree of "do as I tell you, you bastard half-brother of mine, to reclaim my family home" than two siblings working in tandem together.

And the whole reason why she kept Baelish with her was because of his devotion to her. The idea that she needed her Bran Deux Ex Machina Third Eye to find evidence to convict him when she witnessed him commit murder ---- just shows how blind she was to the threat he posed. 

I'm actually glad that they didn't completely erase that aspect of Sansa. TV! Sansa has veered far off thepath that book! Sansa was on, so it's important they try to keep the core elements of her personality the same. 

You mean being upset after just hearing Cersei say Joffery may kill her brother with real glee  and saying she still marry Tyrion spilling from her venom laced lips and finding a strange woman ( who may be Cersei's spy ) in her room, I be pissed too.

She never tells him shit like that, she brings valid points and warnings, and she tells him he needs to play wiser in some aspects of his ruling.

She knows damn well LF not devoted to her, they need the Vale, they need more then he said she said, and she needs Royce, and when she got that he was gone.

Book Sansa is just entering the show, remove the Ramsey joke and we have a young woman, running a great house, making allies, finding double crossing lords, understanding food supplies and administration.

[spaceghostess]

1 hour ago, madam magpie said:

 

I work in publishing and read all day, which is why I prefer audio books for fun. I just can't read anymore when I get home. It is true, though, that reading names often makes it easier to retain them, but I also read Lord of the Rings years ago and could not for the life of me keep track of who was who, so...

Heh, I feel your pain re: the reading issue. My full-time career was in publishing, and I've been a freelance copywriter for the industry ever since my kids were born. Getting to read something I choose is rare as hens' teeth, so I try to cram my reading into dry spells between jobs (read the whole [so far] ASIAF series a few years ago during the slow season). Problem is, when I have a chance to read what I want, I'm sometimes too sick of reading to do it! Still, I can't get into audio books, except to listen in the car. I get antsy if I can't retain character names and stuff, and I only manage to do that successfully if I'm taking in the information visually.