20 replies to this topic

[Drowsey Dragon]

The scene with the dead stag and the direwolf pups is full of symbolism. What I find difficult to understand is the complete indifference of Ned Stark for the pups.

They are the Sigil of his house. You would think he would want to save them at all costs. They represent his house and history and finding them in the North is a very rare event unless you are beyond the wall. This is referenced in the scene.

It appeared to me that Lord Stark could care less about them and would have killed them without a second thought if not for Jon Snow.

Anyone else pick up on this? Any thoughts about this?

[DirePenguin]

Eddard's character, to me, is based on old ,outdated and hardhead old man steriotypes. He is just, yes, but he doesn't adjust nor adapt. That's why when he saw those pups he didn't think of them as anything else but monsters that should be killed. Pretty much everything he did through out his time in King's Landing that leads to his death all falls into this category imo.

Edited by DirePenguin, 07 February 2012 - 05:56 AM.

[Xtopher]

shouldnt you put that in spoiler tags Penguin? i hope that guy already finished the book and isnt talking about this topic because he just read it.

[Wight Walker]

I believe he's more focused on the fact that a dire wolf hasn't been seen beyond the Wall for such a long time and is more worried by the sight of them rather than intrigued by it.

Dire wolves beyond the Wall just trigger the notion that something more may be coming.

[Xtopher]

i would´ve done the same thing as Ned. 5 direwolves appear in your back yard, you kill them before they get big enough to kill you!

[Ygrette]

I cannot particularly recall a Greyjoy with a pet kraken or a Lannister with a pet lion.

I think those sigils are mere symbols (except for the Targaryans) and most highborn never actually think of their symbol as literally having a relationship with that animal. Those people are not necessarily raised within a shamanic worldview and I cannot remember any historic hints at Starks actually keeping direwolves as pets. If you think of modern analogies, look at sports teams with their bears and tigers and crocodiles - how many of those football or basketball fans or players actually have a crocodile or bear at home or wouldn't furiously run for the hills when they met one in the wild?

So the thought of taking them as pets didn't even cross his mind, I guess. They are just dangerous creatures, not meant to be tamed.

Having said all of this, I'm quite the hippy myself and would have begged my father to keep the puppies. The wolves are the primary weapon my husband used against me when he talked me into watching/reading GoT in the first place.


Greetings,
Steph

[Snow Ghost]

Ygrette, on 08 February 2012 - 03:41 AM, said:

I cannot particularly recall a Greyjoy with a pet kraken or a Lannister with a pet lion.

I think those sigils are mere symbols (except for the Targaryans) and most highborn never actually think of their symbol as literally having a relationship with that animal. Those people are not necessarily raised within a shamanic worldview and I cannot remember any historic hints at Starks actually keeping direwolves as pets. If you think of modern analogies, look at sports teams with their bears and tigers and crocodiles - how many of those football or basketball fans or players actually have a crocodile or bear at home or wouldn't furiously run for the hills when they met one in the wild?

So the thought of taking them as pets didn't even cross his mind, I guess. They are just dangerous creatures, not meant to be tamed.

Having said all of this, I'm quite the hippy myself and would have begged my father to keep the puppies. The wolves are the primary weapon my husband used against me when he talked me into watching/reading GoT in the first place.


Greetings,
Steph

Agreed, the sigil of the houses is just a symbolism. Not mentioning Direwolfs are wild beasts, so yeah that's why not only Ned, but all the other northmen with him (save the children) wanted to kill them. But you can always count on the children to save the cute direwolf pups.

[psychogobstopper]

Ygrette, on 08 February 2012 - 03:41 AM, said:

I think those sigils are mere symbols (except for the Targaryans) and most highborn never actually think of their symbol as literally having a relationship with that animal. Those people are not necessarily raised within a shamanic worldview and I cannot remember any historic hints at Starks actually keeping direwolves as pets.

Wouldn't the statues of the old Kings of Winter and previous Lords of Winterfell in the crypt constitute at least a small hint?  At some point the inclusion of direwolves at the sides of those men would have simply been symbolism, of course, since direwolves hadn't been seen in such a long period of time.  Surely, though, that at least the early instances were intended as more representative of the men than mere symbolism of the House, since pains were taken on each statue throughout the ages to as accurately as possible reflect each person's face.

[ZeDisDeaD]

When you learn about Cleganes and how they got their sigil 3 dogs and be a house in Westeros, you'll understand house sigil means sh.t when your ass at stake.

[The Bastard of Bolton]

It did seem odd to me that he would dismiss them so readily, especially when all it takes is a trip down into the tombs to see that it was a Stark standard for at least the Lord of the House to have a Direwolve, generation after generation.

Doesn't make sense that Starks constantly had Direwolves and all a sudden they stopped having them within any real reason.  Who was the first Stark who decided not to breed his Direwolves and break age old tradition?

I think this is just a case that GRRM couldn't have the characters start off with animals because he wanted to set a meaningful scenario/setup for them and establish that changes were taking place in this fictitious continent of Westeros.

[SerDavosShepherd]

I think Ned makes a lot of his decisions based on what he thinks is practical, (as long as that doesn't conflict with his honor). From a practicality standpoint it doesn't make any sense to take the direwolves into Winterfell. Ned is sure that winter is coming and soon, Every bit of food will be necessary for the humans to survive, much less extra meat for six enormous beasts.

In both the book and the show Ned has lines on how the pups would die without something to nurse from. So again practically it didn't make sense to let them lay there and die. He was doing the honorable thing by giving them a quick end.

[Ygrette]

The Bastard of Bolton, on 26 February 2012 - 05:13 PM, said:

It did seem odd to me that he would dismiss them so readily, especially when all it takes is a trip down into the tombs to see that it was a Stark standard for at least the Lord of the House to have a Direwolve, generation after generation.

Are these statues really representatives of live, individual direwolves?

Otherwise, a direwolf statue in a Stark tomb would surprise me as much as a lion statue in Casterly rock. I have only read 3,5 books so far (so please don't spoil me if you have information beyond that) but can't remember to have read any hint that these wolf statues have a meaning other than representing the House Stark. Do they have names? I'm asking because the Targaryens are still familiar with their dragons' names. I would imagine if the wolves have been companions to the Starks and are important enough to be buried with their humans, their names should be known.

[Doran II]

Ygrette, on 27 February 2012 - 02:23 AM, said:

Are these statues really representatives of live, individual direwolves?

Otherwise, a direwolf statue in a Stark tomb would surprise me as much as a lion statue in Casterly rock. I have only read 3,5 books so far (so please don't spoil me if you have information beyond that) but can't remember to have read any hint that these wolf statues have a meaning other than representing the House Stark. Do they have names? I'm asking because the Targaryens are still familiar with their dragons' names. I would imagine if the wolves have been companions to the Starks and are important enough to be buried with their humans, their names should be known.

I remember in the first book scene where Bran finds Rickon in the crypts of Winterfell, maybe there are descriptions of Direwolfs there but im not sure.

[The Bastard of Bolton]

Ygrette it is vague and I am assuming.
They never made specific mention of there lies such and such a Stark with Spike at his feet.
It just makes more sense to me that it was possible that the ancient Starks all did have Direwolves whereas Lannisters each having a pet lion would be harder due to the independent nature of all felines.

[Sandy Snow]

I thought the direwolf at the feet of the statues was in the same vane as the two direwolfs that adorn the lord of winterfells seat, as in, symbolic of the sigil not in any way related to real life creatures.  By all accounts these are monstrous, killer WILD beast, not exactly the kind of animal you want wandering around at your heel.

As has been said, Ned was going to kill them to put them out of their misery, a wholly practical point of view, as is his nature.  Cat states that Ned does not believe in portents and signs so it would make no sense for him to act any other way.

[sumant30]

Drowsey Dragon, on 07 February 2012 - 05:19 AM, said:

The scene with the dead stag and the direwolf pups is full of symbolism. What I find difficult to understand is the complete indifference of Ned Stark for the pups.

They are the Sigil of his house. You would think he would want to save them at all costs. They represent his house and history and finding them in the North is a very rare event unless you are beyond the wall. This is referenced in the scene.

It appeared to me that Lord Stark could care less about them and would have killed them without a second thought if not for Jon Snow.

Anyone else pick up on this? Any thoughts about this?

Lord Stark is really a stubborn headed man in this seriesi agree to that.

[Saxony]

Wight Walker, on 07 February 2012 - 12:29 PM, said:

I believe he's more focused on the fact that a dire wolf hasn't been seen beyond the Wall for such a long time and is more worried by the sight of them rather than intrigued by it.

Dire wolves beyond the Wall just trigger the notion that something more may be coming.

This^^  Ned grew up on wild tales about what's beyond the wall, and just enough of it is true to make him believe all of it.  I can totally see why he wanted to kill them and I don't hold it against him.

[Monica21]

I think the situation with the direwolf was also that it had killed the stag, the symbol of House Baratheon, and then died from the stag's antler through it's skull. Both beasts killed each other. Instead of "Oooo! Cute direwolf puppies!" I remember him being more put off by the bad juju of the symbolism of the event itself.

[Arya Targaryen]

Ygrette, on 27 February 2012 - 02:23 AM, said:

Are these statues really representatives of live, individual direwolves?

Otherwise, a direwolf statue in a Stark tomb would surprise me as much as a lion statue in Casterly rock. I have only read 3,5 books so far (so please don't spoil me if you have information beyond that) but can't remember to have read any hint that these wolf statues have a meaning other than representing the House Stark. Do they have names? I'm asking because the Targaryens are still familiar with their dragons' names. I would imagine if the wolves have been companions to the Starks and are important enough to be buried with their humans, their names should be known.

We don't know much about those statues, but I personally think that the ancient Starks had real direwolves by their sides (and that's why it became the sigil of the House). However, thousands of years have passed since, the direwolves became extinct south of the Wall, so they forgot about it. Targs have a much shorter history: they arrived 300 years ago, and dragons have a much longer lifetime - and became extinct 150 years ago (therefore you need to know much less names).
Anyway, I think it's not happenstance that put the direwolf on the Stark banner. They had a special relationship with their wolves (just my theory, it's never stated outright in the books), but in the next books, with all those pups and Stark kids, you learn more about this.

[Stark bannermen]

The dire wolves are a symbol of the house but I think (this my crackpot about why Ned thought like this) all the kings of winter and then the Lords of Winterfell had dire wolves as part of the pack mate... Now dire wolves are only found beyond the wall this would mean that the Starks have ventured beyond the wall for their own reasons and then found pup... As for Ned I think he knows that there is something that the Starks are suppose to do in the north and when he saw the dead wolf he realised what he's forgotten