Book vs. Show characterisation of SanSan: A TV Critic's Analysis

[brashcandy]

In the Pawn to Player thread an essay was featured analysing the depiction of the relationship between Sansa and Sandor as portrayed on the HBO show compared to the way Martin himself designed and delivered it in the source material. We encourage boarders to add their thoughts and comments in this new thread in what we hope will be a productive and civil discussion.

Please make an effort to read the essay before commenting.

[Mladen]

Ok, here I will reply to certain points raised in essay Miodrag has written for PTP

1. Margaery Tyrell and syndrome of Anne Boleyn

Discussing Natalie Dormer's preformance in GOT, is practicly impossible without echoing her preformance as Anne Boleyn in The Tudors... As uncomparable as they might be, D&D morphed GRRM's Margaery with Anne Boleyn. Sensuality Dormer as adult and beautiful woman has is used to create of her "femme fatale" of Westeros. Driven by ambition unknown for the readers(or at least at that point), Margaery is ready to be impregnated by the help of her brother. Then, after we recalled that Anne Boleyn was indeed charged for sleeping with her brothers, many things become clearer. But, D&D didn't stop there... Famous line "I want to be the Queen" is said in such way that it makes completely impossible to remember which show you are watching. Basically, TV Margery is Showtime's Anne Boleyn, and as actress Dormer commited the gravest sin of acting. She was echoing previous role in the one she got... But, to blame it all on D&D wouldn't be fair. Fans had been utterly disappointed by the quality of GRRM's writing for the show this year, and I had a feeling that GRRM's writing surpassed ASOS, and landed us somewhere in AFFC where MArgaery's sexual activity is in question... So, the entire Matgery's storyline, no matter how interesting, is created with the several purposes that I, as a viewer can only guess... Whether it is introducing Margaery as "femme fatale" which she is not, or some great player of the Game, again what she is not, thing is that Margery quickly fell in a stereotype that is made about women and their role in medieval time - to survive, use sex...

2. Problems with female characters

I won't lie if I would tell that I hate D&D's adaptation of female character. They are stipulated on one role and that leads us to terrible simplicity. Offending the inteligence of the viewers, D&D's array of female characters is full of stereotypical roles... Catelyn Stark, from intelligent, capable and also emotional woman, has been reduced to Robb's mother, Daenerys' road to Westeros has been stipulated to having dragons, and being cool while using them, Arya, Asha and Brienne are simply women who wants to fight, and in Arya case, when you overlook significant ammount of psychological evolution and characterization, you have to wonder how they did it. And last one of them is Sansa... What Miodrag said in his essay, and I completely agree with that, is that D&D have no idea what to do with Sansa... Normally, you wouldn't expect that two such fanboys understand emotions of teenage girls, but we had male writers and directors of fantasy genre, and they didn't stipulate their female characters... But Sansa's greatest problem is her proximity to Tyrion and LF, characters D&D are so interested in... But what annoys beyond merit is the fact that Sansa becomes a mirror for Shae and her problems with Tyrion... And that is something that no director or writer who wants serious adaptation would allow himself/herself to do...

3. Industry issues

Sansa is minor, Sophie is minor, Sandor is 28, Rory McCann is 44... Simply, this was a problem that we should have seen coming from day one. We even know that Tommen is replaced with older actor due to Dormer's age (so no outlawing the beets and Ser Ponce.... damn it...). Simply, TV and movie industry has it rules, and we should know it. We have all seen 25 year-old playing highchool student, and 35 year-old playing their parent... Age is trouble however you see it.. And here, where awkward but somewhat romantic storyline should have happened, those problems became even bigger. So, Blackwater episode was waited by some Sansa fans in anticipation how would TV show be dealing with the scene in Sansa's bedroom. And, I must say, given restrictions, GRRM did amazing job... The scene wasn't the one from the books, but it was the second best thing, when Sansa let Sandor know what she knew: "You won't hurt me". Response was simple, and for a second we knew what was said... Brilliance of this scene on each rewatch amazes me, and I honestly believe that this was the most romantic scene in entire GOT.

4. Tyrion

For Sansa's portrayal on the TV, one of the main culprant is Peter Dinklage. Not Tyrion, but Peter... He is too likable on TV... And that always pulls something. Producers know when they have someone being far more popular than the rest of the cast, and they know how to use it (compare Legolas from books and from LOTR movie trilogy). Simply, book Tyrion and TV Tyrion are two worlds, and that of course pulled neccessary changes. My opinion about wedding and beeding is well known and it hasn't changed ever since. Simply, in the world where producers wants you to feel bad for one character, you simply aren't allowed to be sad about the other.

So, again my congratulations to MIodrag for wonderful critique, and to PTP for acknowledging it. I know how PTP's hosts are reluctant when it comes to mixing books and TV, but I am glad they did make an exception and allowed Miodrag to post it on PTP thread...

[Miodrag]

@Mladen

Once again, thanks for all your compliments, and for a traditionally strong contribution with your post.

I didn't watch "The Tudors", for some reason that show never interested me. (Would you recommend it? Based on your posts I read, especially your love for Dostoyevsky, I'd say we have a very similar taste in art, so your opinion can change, or reaffirm, my attitude.) In any case, several people suggested that TV Margaery is strikingly similar to TV Anne Boleyn. If that's the case, some of the choices D&D made concerning her character would be at least more underdstandable to me - though definitely not more justified.

As for Dinklage, I'm finding harder and harder to like him. I know he's very popular with the fan base, so he must be doing something right, but his attitude toward everything - like, his ever present cynicism - is tiring after a while, to me at least. In any case, if I was behind the wheel in GoT, no actor, no individual, and not Peter Dinklage, would be a reason for me to alter any storyline. You're right, book Tyrion and TV Tyrion are almost completely different persons, and the books one I find fascinating, while the TV one stopped interest me long time ago, somewhere in the early second season.

About female characters, do you - and other posters, of course - share my fascination with that achievement of Martin's? I honestly can't remember any other work of fiction that deals with a cast that is this well balanced along gender lines. Even Dostoyevsky, who's the biggest literary mind of all times in my humble opinion, was lacking female characters that would match his male heroes. GRRM may very well be in the league of his own in that regard, to my knowledge at least: Cat, Sansa, Cersei and possibly Melisandre (she's still a mystery, but quite a powerful one, and she promises something great down the line) are characters that would proud any writer ever (that's not to say that other female characters are any weaker - they're not, but these four are something that I've never seen a male mind to come up with; for comparison sake, Faulkner did create at least one great female character, Caddy Compson, but she's shown from far away, not up close and personal as Martin's girls, while Fitzgerald's Daisy is a great villain and really deep as a character, but even she pales in comparison to, say, one Cersei Lannister).

[Mladen]

@Mladen

Once again, thanks for all your compliments, and for a traditionally strong contribution with your post.

I didn't watch "The Tudors", for some reason that show never interested me. (Would you recommend it? Based on your posts I read, especially your love for Dostoyevsky, I'd say we have a very similar taste in art, so your opinion can change, or reaffirm, my attitude.) In any case, several people suggested that TV Margaery is strikingly similar to TV Anne Boleyn. If that's the case, some of the choices D&D made concerning her character would be at least more underdstandable to me - though definitely not more justified.

Thank you very much. I am humbled with your praise...

I like British history, and my cousin who fancies Jonathan Rhys Meyers made me watch it... It's not bad but it isn't something I would strongly recommend. Especially given that Henry VIII looks more like a model than actual person. I did enjoy Catherine of Aragon's speech on trial (good work from Maria Doyle Kennedy), and I was more interested in politics of that time, but unfortunately show lacked of that depth. Yes, Dormer's preformance as Margaery and Anne Boleyn is disturbingly identical, especially when it comes to "You are the King, you can whatever you like" and "I want to be the Queen" lines. I don't know whether it is coincedence, or simply bad writing, but I find annoying that one actress say basically same lines in 2 different shows in a same manner... Simply, Showtime's Anne Boleyn, and GRRM's Margaery aren't that comparable, but somehow in TV show, they equalized them...

And yes, I am quite into Russian realists, especially Tolstoy and Dostoyevski

About female characters, do you - and other posters, of course - share my fascination with that achievement of Martin's? I honestly can't remember any other work of fiction that deals with a cast that is this well balanced along gender lines. Even Dostoyevsky, who's the biggest literary mind of all times in my humble opinion, was lacking female characters that would match his male heroes.

I do believe that GRRM when it comes to female characters, had gone into depth where so few other writers of fantasy genre has gone before. I am truly fascinated with symbolism surrounding female characters, and am currently working on an essay about feminism in Martin's she-wolves. I also believe, that Martin equalized two genders, you know, it's totally unimportant whether you are man or woman when you play the Game. At the end, one will win, other will lose. As for Dostoyevski, I think Tolstoy is better example of Russian novelists doing wonders with female character. I especially adore the trio of Anna, Dolly and Kitty in "Anna Karenina". Although you could say that Tolstoy's ideas of family are a bit outdated, his female characters have different types of courage to deal with issues in their lives. Anna threw a glove into society's face, Dolly endured everything for the kids, and Kitty had to find a strength to rebuild her life after broken heart. Also the dualism of Anna/Konstantin is so striking that you could feel equality Tolstoy tends to depict, and Levin's angelic view on Kitty where she is seen as an angel guiding him to better tomorrow...

[Colonel Green]

Sansa is minor, Sophie is minor, Sandor is 28, Rory McCann is 44... Simply, this was a problem that we should have seen coming from day one.

This is one of the things that has always led to me question whether the Sansa/Sandor stuff is really going anywhere in the books (or, at least, going where its fans clearly want it to). The Hound is in his late 20s in the books, and it would have been very easy to cast the role with somebody Joe Dempsie's age.

I'm on the record as finding the relationship creepy and inappropriate in the books, for what it's worth, so that may just be wish projection.

[Ser Pounce FTW]

This is one of the things that has always led to me question whether the Sansa/Sandor stuff is really going anywhere in the books (or, at least, going where its fans clearly want it to). The Hound is in his late 20s in the books, and it would have been very easy to cast the role with somebody Joe Dempsie's age.

I'm on the record as finding the relationship creepy and inappropriate in the books, for what it's worth, so that may just be wish projection.

If you read the posts in the PtP threads, it hardly matters where the "relationship" goes (and I agree, it is more than likely going to fizzle out with Sandor dying in the arms of Sansa and there may be, really, MAY be, one night of "lurve making" that results in a bastard child before his death) but that these two have already done all that is required for it to be THE romance of the books.

On the show, there will only be his death (on screen) and perhaps some slight hint of "other" things given the ages of the actors. I agree, the casting was a big spoiler. I admit thinking there was absolutely NO future for the pair but I did read something about a legendary character with a name similar to his that saved two sisters and slept with one of them after becoming lame, so, take that as you will.

I've always found the feminist support of Sansan puzzling since he hardly treats her as an equal and threatens her with death and rape constantly (albeit that he wouldn't do those things to his "little bird") while Sansa is merely responding romantically to the ONLY person who shows her any only honest, kindness in King's Landing. I'll never understand the appeal other than good girls like bad boys and women love men who rip bodices. :dunno:

I would rather Sansa remain single or understand that Westerosi nobles do not marry for love but that love can often come later, as it did with her own mother and father. I would argue that D & D are thinking the same or they know how Martin plans for this to end. Either way, I find the show has given us a more mature Sansa but that she has indeed lost some of the nuance book Sansa has. It remains to be seen how things progress before I will say definitively whether it was a bad or good interpretation.

[Colonel Green]

I've always found the feminist support of Sansan puzzling since he hardly treats her as an equal and threatens her with death and rape constantly (albeit that he wouldn't do those things to his "little bird") while Sansa is merely responding romantically to the ONLY person who shows her any only honest, kindness in King's Landing. I'll never understand the appeal other than good girls like bad boys and women love men who rip bodices. :dunno:

I agree there. It's obvious that interacting with Sansa was ultimately a positive influence on the Hound, but the idea of that actually becoming romantic disturbs me (also, the age issue; I really can't support a story that involves a guy blatantly perving on an 11-year-old).

[Newstar]

This is one of the things that has always led to me question whether the Sansa/Sandor stuff is really going anywhere in the books (or, at least, going where its fans clearly want it to). The Hound is in his late 20s in the books, and it would have been very easy to cast the role with somebody Joe Dempsie's age.

Eh, as distasteful as it is, Littlefinger, Tyrion and the Hound, the major men in Sansa's life in the books--all of whom have some sort of canon sexual interest in her--are fairly close together in age, and the youngest of them, Tyrion (not the Hound), is at least twice her age (26 or so at the start of the books). The show's not much different than that, except that they bumped them all up in age, much as they did with most of the actors playing the characters in the "older generation." The Hound, Littlefinger and Tyrion are all played by actors who are very close in age, and that roughly reflects the books. It would be weird to cast an actor who was 28, Richard Madden's age or thereabouts, as the Hound with Tyrion, a character who's actually younger than the Hound in the books, played by an actor at least 15 years older. Keeping the Hound in the same rough age bracket as Tyrion and Littlefinger makes a lot of sense.

I think there are a few factors that resulted in the TV depiction of Sandor and Sansa's relationship being...what it was.

1. The Age Factor: It would be one thing if Sansa were being played by a twentysomething actress (as Dany is), or if the Hound were played by an actor Joe Dempsie's age, but Sophie Turner was a minor when Season 2 was filmed and Rory McCann was in his 40s, so there we are. That factor alone seemed to dictate a lot of the changes. This has influenced a lot of how Tyrion's interactions with Sansa have been written, as well, so it's not just the Hound who's been affected by this.

2. The Creep Factor: It's one thing to show Littlefinger perving on Sansa and would-be rapists attacking Sansa, since they're established as repulsive, but since the Hound is, while not a stellar human being by any measure, not supposed to come across as a Littlefinger/rapist-level creep, the show toned down any whiff of sexual interest on the Hound's part. The Hound having a thing for Sansa seemed to be part of the meta canon--Benioff talks about the Hound being "attracted" to Sansa in a talking head segment--but it was pretty much excised from what you actually see in the show. The only hint of any sexual interest was the Hound leering at Sansa as he advanced on her in 1x08. Nothing was explicitly stated. The show did a similar thing with Tyrion for the marriage arc in Season 3; other characters accused Tyrion of being sexually interested in Sansa, but there was never an admission on his part that he was attracted to her, even though in the 3x08 talking head segment with Benioff he characterized Tyrion as being attracted to Sansa to some extent; there are non-book readers who didn't think that Tyrion had any sexual interest in Sansa at all. So the Hound can't show or admit any open sexual interest in Sansa without being lumped in with creeps like Littlefinger and her would-be rapists, given that she's all of 13/14 years old, and thus the Sandor/Sansa dynamic is going to be pretty different than it is in the books.

(It's funny that TV Sandor tells Arya about saving Sansa from her would-be rapists and sternly informs Arya that there are men out there who want to "rape little girls," like Arya and presumably Sansa, when Book Sandor wails to Arya that he should have raped Sansa when he had the chance rather than leave her for Tyrion. Ha!)

3. The Time Factor: Remember in Season 1, where we had these lovely little scenes that did nothing to move the plot forward, foreshadow plot developments, or provide essential character points, but which helped us get to know the characters a little better? Robert/Cersei, Jaime/Jory, Theon/Tyrion...Well, as I learned, those were "filler" scenes created precisely because the writers had come up short time-wise and needed to fill some extra minutes. There isn't room for those scenes beyond Season 1, because there just isn't time for scenes that don't serve some key plot function. So a lot of the Sandor/Sansa stuff gets cut or trimmed down drastically to the point where it only serves to set up and explain Sandor saving Sansa in the riot and Sandor offering to take Sansa with him (and whatever happens beyond ADWD if they meet again, I suppose). Anything else is expendable, especially since Sandor/Sansa had to compete with all the other King's Landing plot balls in the air for airtime in Season 2.

Even if the writers do have room for scenes that don't serve some essential plot function beyond Season 1, it will likely be Tyrion and/or Cersei who get them, probably because being more entertaining, flashy, quotable characters, they make for more interesting TV than characters like Sansa do.

4. Sandor's Toned-Down Characterization: A lot of characters making the jump to TV were toned down considerably. TV Hound is a different animal (sorry) than in the books. He's nicer, calmer, more stoic, less emotional, and much less threatening. There's no real sense of danger or menace to the guy; he seems much more in control of himself. He even takes a moment to compose himself after killing Sansa's attackers in 2x06 before grabbing her; Book Hound never had that level of self-control or awareness. The only hint of him showing any menace towards Sansa was in the deleted scene that should have gone in 2x03, which wound up on the cutting room floor, and in his other scenes, which did air, he came across as much more stoic and stolid than in the books. In the book version of the Blackwater scene, the reader completely understands why Sansa's terrified of this guy, because he seems genuinely dangerous. In the show version of the scene, there's never any sense that the Hound poses any kind of danger to Sansa; TV Hound may get in her face, but he would never throw Sansa down and put a knife to her throat, since he seems to know better than that and to have more self-control than that. TV Hound conducts himself the way Book Hound should have conducted himself, which is why when TV Sansa turns down his considerate, genuine offer of rescue, the non-book reader is left scratching their head at her baffling refusal. So there's no sense that Sansa is "taming" Sandor, or that he's a volatile person who's bettered by Sansa's influence, since he seems in control of himself and on an even keel for most of Season 2.

5. Production Issues Leading to Changes Not Previously Intended: A lot of the changes complained of seem to be things that were done on the fly or were never intended. Sandor was supposed to tell his own story about the scars, but it was cut because of production issues and given to Littlefinger. A serpentine steps scene embodying much of the Book Sandor/Sansa dynamic--Sandor harassing Sansa and being a jerk, Sansa being scared, stuff about songs, etc. etc.--was written and was even filmed, but was cut (presumably for time) and wound up as a deleted scene. Sandor did have a take where he shouted "Enough!" in the 2x04 beating/stripping scene, but it was cut (presumably for time). Sansa did originally sing for Sandor in the TV version of the Blackwater scene, but it was cut (it seemed redundant after the bit where she led the hymn in the previous scene, I guess). So while the end result might have a very different flavour than the books, it's debatable to what extent those changes were the result of conscious decisions by the writers as opposed to changes necessitated by production issues.

But that aside, let's get to the bulk of the essay:

1. Margaery in the books is kind of a cipher, so I don't consider the TV take on Margaery as a sly, cunning, sexually savvy femme fatale type to be some radical revisionist version. In the books, we only get to know the "public" version of Margaery, after all.

2. Littlefinger getting Sandor's speech was the result of "production issues" meaning that Sandor couldn't do it. I wouldn't read too much into it, since the original plan was for Sandor to do it. The altered version of the scene with Littlefinger is not optimal, but at least establishes Littlefinger as a guy eager to establish a rapport with Sansa by bringing her into his confidence, and as a dude in the know.

3. I agree that Sandor's dangerous side was toned down, but a lot of characters were toned down for the show. Sansa and Catelyn were toned down, too, as the author of the essay points out.

4. Hahaha, Sansa was not "literally" butchered. (Sorry, but the abuse of "literally" is one of my pet peeves.) Her chopped-up body parts were not littering the floor at any point.

5. I think D&D did as much with SanSan as they could given the constraints they were operating under: time, Sophie Turner's age, the creep factor, etc. etc. What got aired was a bit of a muddle, but they seemed to be going for something, or else they would have cut it altogether.

6. The Dontos plot got shuffled around to make way for the Littlefinger escape plot in Season 3. D&D have said Dontos is back for Season 4, so I think it's a bit early to worry about that.

7. The problem with Sansa is that she makes for lousy TV. D&D love the Lannisters, and I suspect it's because the Lannisters make awesome TV: they're flashy, energetic, charismatic, witty, quotable, and highly entertaining. Sansa is many things, but she is not entertaining. She might evoke sympathy in the viewer, but interest? Less so. Without external sources of stimuli (like a Dontos escape plot or some rageaholic ranting at her) or a POV voice to convey her thoughts and make her interesting, TV Sansa doesn't bring that much to the table; she's just sort of...there.

8. Skipping over all the SanSan stanning...

9. Hahaha, if the author thinks Sansa in the books is going to undergo some sort of soul-searching out of her guilt for going to Cersei in AGOT, they have another think coming. Sansa is not that girl.

[Colonel Green]

7. The problem with Sansa is that she makes for lousy TV.

You're describing the result of the writers' actions, not the cause. They cut all her more active plot elements from seasons 2 and 3, leaving her with nothing to do but stand around.

[Newstar]

You're describing the result of the writers' actions, not the cause. They cut all her more active plot elements from seasons 2 and 3, leaving her with nothing to do but stand around.

That's it, though. She's not inherently interesting. You're saying the writers needed to give her things to do to make her interesting. She doesn't have qualities of her own that make her interesting without fancy external plots to jazz her up. You can't just put her in a room with someone and have her shoot the breeze and have that be an interesting scene, because she's not clever or charismatic enough to pull it off. And that's fine in the books, because Sansa brings her POV thoughts and perspective to the table, even if she doesn't bring much intelligence or charisma to bear, but for TV, where we lose everything we get through her POV narration, it's not going to work.

There's an argument that the show writers made Sansa even stupider and duller in Season 3 to make Margaery's intelligence, savvy, charm and charisma shine even brighter, but that's Season 3, not Season 2, which is the SanSan season (or should have been, I guess, if the critics are to be believed).

But they cut the punchline of the story: the part where the Tyrells abandon her, and she realizes that everybody's just using her for her claim. At the end of the season, Sansa hasn't learned anything.

Mmm, I dunno. In the books, she was sad that Margaery dropped her like a bad habit after the wedding and was appalled when she learned that the Tyrells had used her to murder Joffrey, so the scales didn't truly fall from her eyes about the Tyrells until after the PW. She gets the message about her claim at the wedding, but not about the Tyrells. That's not inconsistent with the show, really; it's just that Margaery's show of friendliness towards Sansa extended a little further than it did in the books. I expect the TV Tyrells will be all smiles to Sansa until the Purple Wedding, which will really twist the knife when Sansa realizes that they used her to murder Joffrey.

[Colonel Green]

That's it, though. She's not inherently interesting. You're saying the writers needed to give her things to do to make her interesting.

She's not funny, no. But not every character is. And I would hardly call that the same as being interesting. If the show's writers don't know how to deal with that, they aren't particularly good writers. Moreover, if she's a character who needs more in the way of plot to shine, then that shouldn't be a problem, because she has a plot. Or she would, if they hadn't cut it.

They've also altered her stories in ways that remove any character development from them. Like, at the start of the season, the writers were saying in interviews that the Tyrell plotline shows Sansa who, after thinking chivalry is dead, gets her hope reawakened by the Tyrells showing up. I've previously stated that I think the show overdid that part a bit, but that's basically accurate. But they cut the punchline of the story: the part where the Tyrells abandon her, and she realizes that everybody's just using her for her claim. At the end of the season, Sansa hasn't learned anything, nor is there any sense that she's supposed to have. She's a plot token who cries silently whenever something bad happens, and whose reactions aren't considered worth exploring beyond that.

[Ser Pounce FTW]

I agree there. It's obvious that interacting with Sansa was ultimately a positive influence on the Hound, but the idea of that actually becoming romantic disturbs me (also, the age issue; I really can't support a story that involves a guy blatantly perving on an 11-year-old).

I actually don't have a problem with their ages in the book since there are tons of teens coupled with adult men in the series, but anyone could see that that wasn't going to fly on screen. As stated in the essay there are laws against that but even if there weren't, it is a very different thing to see a 40 year old man saying "Wow. You've got teats" to at 14 year old girl in the 21st century. I won't even begin to address how people would have reacted to the bedroom scene, regardless of how it ended.

That's it, though. She's not inherently interesting. You're saying the writers needed to give her things to do to make her interesting. She doesn't have qualities of her own that make her interesting without fancy external plots to jazz her up. You can't just put her in a room with someone and have her shoot the breeze and have that be an interesting scene, because she's not clever or charismatic enough to pull it off.

There's an argument that the show writers made Sansa even stupider and duller in Season 3 to make Margaery's intelligence, charm and charisma even more obvious, but that's Season 3, not Season 2, which is the SanSan season (or should have been, I guess, if the critics are to be believed).

I think the problem here is most of Sansa's complexity comes from us reading her thoughts and then viewing her actions. Since the series choose NOT to follow the original Dune movie and have thoughts "heard", much of Sansa's arc was, and will be, lost. But there have been conscious decisions not to include some things which also alter how Sansa is perceived on the show vs. the book such as her going to Cersei, her not telling her plans to LF/Dontos, (not) kneeling during the wedding and her not being as entrenched in fairytales. Those are really big moments for Sansa in the books but have been omitted in the show. It makes for a slightly different Sansa but I read a lot of the Unsullied comments and the differences are not as big as some would think. But there are definitely differences.

[Newstar]

The not

I actually don't have a problem with their ages in the book since there are tons of teens coupled with adult men in the series, but anyone could see that that wasn't going to fly on screen. As stated in the essay there are laws against that but even if there weren't, it is a very different thing to see a 40 year old man saying "Wow. You've got teats" to at 14 year old girl in the 21st century. I won't even begin to address how people would have reacted to the bedroom scene, regardless of how it ended.

Hahaha, yeah, the Hound commenting on Sansa's breasts was not going to work. Nor would the bedroom scene, as it was in the books. I dunno, though. That some people can ship SanSan after the Blackwater scene, where he shoves a 12-year-old down on a bed and threatens her at knifepoint, and that some people seem to ship SanSan because of the Blackwater scene, creeps me out to no end. The romanticization of abuse and violence, etc. etc. If they had filmed it as in the books and if the bulk of the TV viewership had been horrified and outraged as a result, it might have been a bit of a reality check to the shippers. (Of course, the worst part is that there would have been people who shipped it regardless. We live in a world where Twilight has a guy cutting his girlfriend's brakes and it's framed as a romantic gesture.)

Hmm, maybe that's another reason why TV SanSan was toned down...the possible romantic subtext linked to abusive behaviours and violence (it's all very "He hit me and it felt like a kiss"), the Sandor/Sansa relationship in the books hitting abusive tropes (the woman enduring the man's abuse to "tame" him, e.g.). Of course, the deleted scene in 2x03 hit all those points--Sandor yelling at Sansa, getting in her face, trapping her against a wall, etc. etc.--so maybe there isn't any sort of higher, more enlightened awareness at play.

But there have been conscious decisions not to include some things which also alter how Sansa is percieved on the show vs. the book such as her going to Cersei, her not telling her plans to LF/Dontos, (not) kneeling during the wedding and her not being as entrenched in fairytales. Those are really big moments for Sansa in the books but have been omitted in the show.

There are some things that no amount of POV narration can fix--"It should have been you"--but I think Sansa's Cersei moment and her wedding moment became unfilmable because of her loss of POV.

Book Sansa refusing to kneel, through POV: No one cares about her feelings, she'd dreamt of a tall husband for her wedding day, she won't show consideration for Tyrion's feelings when she's been railroaded into this nightmare and Tyrion has been complicit in the affair, etc.

TV Sansa refusing to kneel for Tyrion, sans POV: Ohhhhhh, it would have been bad. It would have been irredeemably bad. Even if TV Tyrion were as hideous, as scarred, and as unsympathetic as his book self in ASOS, and even if TV Sansa had been railroaded into the marriage with a last-minute ambush with Tyrion's knowledge as in ASOS, there would have been no coming back from that for Sansa. The viewership's sympathies would have been lost forever.

[Ser Pounce FTW]

(Of course, the worst part is that there would have been people who shipped it regardless. We live in a world where Twilight has a guy cutting his girlfriend's brakes and it's framed as a romantic gesture.)

How could I have forgotten about the cut brakes?!!? I bring it up constantly to Twilight lovers! Yes, it might not have been as disasterous as I imagine. *sighs and shakes head*

There are some things that no amount of POV narration can fix--"It should have been you"--but I think Sansa's Cersei moment and her wedding moment became unfilmable because of her loss of POV.

Book Sansa refusing to kneel, through POV: No one cares about her feelings, she'd dreamt of a tall husband for her wedding day, she won't show consideration for Tyrion's feelings when she's been railroaded into this nightmare and Tyrion has been complicit in the affair, etc.

TV Sansa refusing to kneel for Tyrion, sans POV: Ohhhhhh, it would have been bad. It would have been irredeemably bad. Even if TV Tyrion were as hideous, as scarred, and as unsympathetic as his book self in ASOS, and even if TV Sansa had been railroaded into the marriage with a last-minute ambush with Tyrion's knowledge as in ASOS, there would have been no coming back from that for Sansa. The viewership's sympathies would have been lost forever.

I agree. Which I was trying to illustrate but perhaps was not so clear. Without the benefit of her thoughts, viewing her actions becomes a very different experience.

[Cruella]

Great write up, Newstar. I agree. And I love Sansa, but I also agree that she's a difficult character to portray on TV show. She has to appear outwardly meek, IS actually beaten down to a big degree, and is helpless to do much of anything over than endure. I find it very relatable, but dynamic TV it aint.

[Miodrag]

@Newstar

Thanks for reading the essay and commenting on it, but I have to disagree with a lot of things you said. One exception would be your point about using the word "literal". You're right, it often is an exaggeration, and I hope mine wasn't that bad.

But, I'm similarly opposed to using a term "shipper" in discussing SanSan, because of the connotation the term usually carries. SanSan is not some typical love story in which things were designed and are going to be resolved in some typical, overused, cliched manner. Recognizing a mutual romantic interest between Sandor and Sansa is not shipping them, not in a usual sense at least. As someone noted earlier, there's enough substance that already exposes the romantic interest between them - even though there wasn't a single physical aspect in their relationship, and a lot of their actions toward each other (along with big parts of that interest) may very well be subconscious. Will they end together or not, I couldn't predict for the life of me (GRRM made me give up predicting his saga ages ago anyway). Maybe their story in the future won't be about 'being together' at all. But, the two of them have a story. They have some history. And I'm pretty certain some closure is in store for their story.

The show almost completely disregarded that story, which is not something that personally bothers me (I watch the show solely for the purpose of analyzing D&D's failures, truth be told, because it's a unique occasion to follow and observe the process of adapting - even a bad one - on this scale), but it does speak of D&D's competence. Sansa is among the most important characters in the whole saga, and her relation with Sandor is arguably the most significant thing she was willingly engaged in. If an adaptation lacks that part, it's hardly a successful one in my book.

Also, I don't see what aspect of SanSan would be so creepy and inappropriate for filming. They don't share so much as a kiss, let alone some 'more demanding' exchange. Martin delivered their romance through Sandor's unexpected and extraordinary behavior around Sansa, and through Sansa's telling reactions to that behavior. That's it. There are no countless paragraphs Martin wrote about SanSan, nor some vast amounts of Sansa's inner thoughts on the matter. Martin depicted everything through dialogue. All D&D had to do is to follow that dialogue. But no, they gave the most important parts of it to another character, which is something I honestly can't fathom in any successful adaptation, not do I remember any other adaptation pulled anything similar: there are cases when a character is entirely removed, and his/her lines are given to other characters, but lines so essential to some of the most important characters are never given away to other characters. That alteration can't help but change everyone involved: Sandor, Littlefinger and Sansa (her latter attitude toward Sandor is logical only if he's the one who tells her the story of his face). It just can't be the same if a story about something defines Sandor is told by him or by someone else.

And sorry, but I can't buy the 'production issues' explanation. It was scripted for Sandor to deliver the story, but it somehow happened that Rory wasn't around for the shooting and therefore Aidan had to jump in? First, that kind of things don't happen without someone from the production team getting fired. Second, they've done it again, in the second season, and it was Petyr once again. Third, it isn't logical even. What, Aidan Gillen was there for no reason, while Rory, who was supposed to be there, wasn't around?! I call bullshit. And I'm generous, because honestly, if the 'production issues' were the reason, then GoT has much bigger problems than bad writing - if scripted stuff can't be filmed because actors needed aren't available when and where they are needed, then the shooting of GoT is a much bigger mess than I anticipated.

[Colonel Green]

And sorry, but I can't buy the 'production issues' explanation. It was scripted for Sandor to deliver the story, but it somehow happened that Rory wasn't around for the shooting and therefore Aidan had to jump in? First, that kind of things don't happen without someone from the production team getting fired. Second, they've done it again, in the second season, and it was Petyr once again. Third, it isn't logical even. What, Aidan Gillen was there for no reason, while Rory, who was supposed to be there, wasn't around?! I call bullshit. And I'm generous, because honestly, if the 'production issues' were the reason, then GoT has much bigger problems than bad writing - if scripted stuff can't be filmed because actors needed aren't available when and where they are needed, then the shooting of GoT is a much bigger mess than I anticipated.

As I understand it, the weather caused major problems in shooting the whole tourney sequence, and they ended up cobbling together what we saw in the episode. I don't see any reason to doubt it; they've never felt the need to "justify" any of the other changes they've made like that.

[Miodrag]

@Newstar

As for Sansa being 'lousy TV', I have to strongly disagree with that as well. Theoretically, the recent history of TV dramas proved characters can be interesting and useful for narrative and dramatic purposes even if they aren't charismatic. Spouses and kids of protagonists are usually not charismatic, but if they're written and acted craftily, they can add so much to the story. Look, for example, at Skyler White, Walt's wife from "Breaking Bad" - she really isn't charismatic as a character, and she was always in the shadow of her husband, but she was interesting and she's precious for the story, and in the current season her character does pay off big time. Or look at Dr. Melfi, Tony's psychiatrist from "The Sopranos". She's totaly anti-charismatic, just like a psychiatrist is supposed to be, but she was never boring, and she was possibly the most revolutionary character in TV ever (I mean, a female psychiatrist who treats a mafia boss! only David Chase could come up with something like that) which practically enabled "The Sopranos" - I can imagine that show without Tony's kids, or without any of his associates, but I can't imagine "The Sopranos" without Melfi. To conclude, charismatic doesn't equal interesting. In fact, both Melfi and Skyler are infinitely more interesting and deep and rewarding and better TV than any number of 'charismatic' characters from some cliched shows like 'Lost' or 'Prison Break'.

And in this particular case, I'd never describe Sansa as someone who lacks personal charisma. She maybe isn't the most charismatic person in ASOIAF, and, just like you say, it's hard to beat the Lannisters in that regard, and she is doomed to be around Lannisters for quite a long time. But, that's where SanSan and Dontos come big. Sansa does attract one Sandor Clegane, a cynical brute who doesn't fall so easily for other people. And Dontos does risk a lot with helping her, which constantly reminds us how important she actually is (eventually, Dontos did all that for the money, but the fact remains that someone was willing to pay him that money in order to help Sansa, so, as far as her importance is concerned, Dontos' eventual motivation has no consequence). If you took all that away from Sansa, yeah, she'll be uninteresting, just like she is on TV. In the books, she attracts Sandor personally, and she attracts Dontos due to her importance in the society (though, truth be told, for a long time it looks like she also inspired Dontos' help personally, with her saving him from Joff), which means her 'charisma' is not only internal as many claim. The show removed both of those aspects, so TV Sansa cna't help but look non-charismatic. And on top of everything, they altered Joff's sick fascination with her, into his sick fascination with women. In the novels, he's punishing her for that one time ages ago she witnessed his weakness - how's that for Sansa's charisma! Her opinion is so important to him, that he can't help but punish her over and over again! In the show, however, Joff isn't particularly interested in hurting Sansa, but in hurting women, and Sansa just happens to be around.

So yeah, D&D took away from her the three basic fascinations she inspired. How was she not to turn out boring on screen?! Not to mention idiotic lines like using "shifting" as a bad word!

[Ser Pounce FTW]

As someone noted earlier, there's enough substance that already exposes the romantic interest between them -

I was being sarcastic but I agree, they definitely have a story together.

Also, I don't see what aspect of SanSan would be so creepy and inappropriate for filming. They don't share so much as a kiss, let alone some 'more demanding' exchange. Martin delivered their romance through Sandor's unexpected and extraordinary behavior around Sansa, and through Sansa's telling reactions to that behavior. That's it. There are no countless paragraphs Martin wrote about SanSan, nor some vast amounts of Sansa's inner thoughts on the matter. Martin depicted everything through dialogue.

This is completely incorrect. The dialogue between Sandor and Sansa shows a trust and respect growing between the two and not a romance (although I suppose Sansan shippers could argue it started the minute they saw one another), and this comes through in the show albeit more subtle. The romantic angle begins during the bedroom scene and continues to develop in Sansa's thoughts. I believe we'll see Sandor refer to Sansa during his time with Arya as it was in the books but it would be very hard to show Sansa's frequent thoughts about him that occurs in the Vale and her creation of the imaginary kiss.

As for inappropriate to film, the bedroom scene is ripe with violent and sexual undertones, which is what makes it so interesting to read. But as I said before, showing a 40 year old man throw a 14 year old girl on a bed and then holding a knife to her throat as he makes demands is controversial, to see the least, and would never fly. It wouldn't even have happened if they had cast the Hound as the younger man he was in the book. To ignore the negatives of the scene in favor of focusing on it's positive aspects - Sansa manages to get control of the situation and show Sandor compassion - is dangerous and no televsion network would dream of touching that with a 10 foot pole. And as Newstar mentioned, the constant, violent grabbing and forcing Sansa to stop and listen to him wouldn't go over well either.

I also don't think anyone says Sansa has no charisma. Good grief, every man that sees her wants to sleep with her and everyone comments on how sweet she it. I think the difficulty with Sansa's character is she is very internal and that doesn't make for good viewing.

[Newstar]

But, I'm similarly opposed to using a term "shipper" in discussing SanSan, because of the connotation the term usually carries.

It's an overused term, I agree, but a handy one. And if you devote a wall of text to talking about the "mutual romantic interest" between characters X and Y in a positive, even glowing way, you're an X/Y shipper, sorry.

Sansa is among the most important characters in the whole saga, and her relation with Sandor is arguably the most significant thing she was willingly engaged in. If an adaptation lacks that part, it's hardly a successful one in my book.

The problem is that there are probably about 30 major characters in play in GOT at any one time, and of those, there are about 12 "most important" characters. There are probably three "top" characters, just as in ASOIAF (being Jon, Dany and Tyrion), but Sansa is not one of them. Her love life is of necessity going to take a backseat, except where it serves the plot.

Also, I don't see what aspect of SanSan would be so creepy and inappropriate for filming. They don't share so much as a kiss, let alone some 'more demanding' exchange.

If you don't see Book Sandor's behaviour towards Sansa--including but not limited to threatening to kill her more than once, commenting on her breasts, putting a naked sword next to her throat, and straddling her on a bed at knifepoint and telling her to sing for her life--as creepy and inappropriate in of itself, let alone inappropriate for filming between an adult in his 40s and a child...well, I'm afraid I can't help you there.

And sorry, but I can't buy the 'production issues' explanation.

I agree it struck me as fishy the first time I heard it, but Colonel Green's explanation is the correct one.