Blue-Eyed Wolf

Members
  • Content count

    331
  • Joined

  • Last visited

4 Followers

About Blue-Eyed Wolf

  • Rank
    Hedge Knight

Recent Profile Visitors

3,151 profile views
  1. I was only responding to Wolf of the Wall that knighthood isn't exactly an example of a noble raising up another noble. Even a hedge knight can take a squire and knight them eventually. All perfectly legit. But all knights, even landed ones, are not necessarily "nobility" in the sense of being a peer of the realm. Granted, having land means you are a "somebody" to a degree. A knight's title doesn't change from acquiring lands. He's still Ser So-and-so, but you could say his privileges have increased. He gets income now from the peasants. I know it gets murky in terms of actual practice of running a piece of land and how their smallfolk treat them, but there does seem to be difference in pecking order among the nobility themselves. Knights are certainly a higher social status than smallfolk with more privileges as a distinct warrior class. The extent of a landed knight's power and privilege would probably largely depend upon the house he serves. The Cleganes directly serve House Lannister which is obviously very rich and powerful. Generally speaking though, knights are still too low ranking to marry into your average noble house unless they already come from a noble house. There's so much elitism in evaluating pedigree, which is why the Frey's are still seen as upstarts 600 years after getting their title. Upward mobility is purposely hard to acquire. And as you say, even being a low-level noble with a surname doesn't mean knighthood was a factor. Still cases like the Pooles and Cassels are so low on the totem pole that no one even refers to them with any manner of noble title. I mean the Cassels technically have a "house," just not a brick and mortar one. They live and serve at Winterfell. I would say that stewards and captain of the guards are household leadership positions. They would have people taking orders from them, so it makes sense to have your lower level nobility even in smaller privileged positions. The Stark's kennelmaster, Farlen, is definitely not nobility neither is Hullen, the master of horse. So in the case of the Cleganes, they do have a surname, but we have no idea when or how that was acquired. Did it come after or before the land grant? We may never know. But considering their grandfather's job was on the level of kennelmaster, not a leadership role, they probably weren't even on equal footing to a Poole or Cassel in practice. The whole story the Hound tells makes it seem like it was a huge increase in status and honors received for saving Tytos's life. I totally agree things wouldn't happen fast and it would be a very long haul. I would say that with Winter and the wars coming we should expect massive death tolls to decrease populations further. We don't even know what houses are even going to survive to the end or how the political landscape will change. However, there's opportunity here. Even in the recovery period from the real life Black Death the survivors benefited from newly available land, and increase in demand for labor, and increase in wages. There was prosperity gained in the aftermath. The fact that Ned mentions this as a dream for spring, has got to mean the Gift will play some kind of important role in the future. Okay, thanks for pointing that out. The point being, Tytos still had the means of making knighthood happen. I agree. Lord Nestor Royce is definitely head of a cadet branch, which implies there was an estate somewhere along the line. Where they were living before the appointment to the Gates of the Moon we have no clue. It could have been destroyed or lost somehow due to mismanagement or debts at some point in the past. Certainly his current position is more prestigious than whatever old one they had. Perhaps evens the playing field a bit more between him and the Runestone cousins. Hence his determination to hold on to it by any means necessary, even becoming an accomplice to the likes of LF. He does have going for him right now is that the IT is a little bit preoccupied with other matters. His ownership does hinge upon making sure LF is successful in holding his position and making his decrees stick long term. I agree having your own treasurer is a big deal, but what unique features of Dornish law are real thorns in the side of the other 6 kingdoms? The highlight of Dornish law is that females and males are generally considered equal. That's certainly not something done elsewhere, but it doesn't appear to be something anyone gets riled up about. They don't really have a bastard prejudice culturally, but bastards don't have inheritance rights there either. I might be wrong, I just don't recall anything specific. Well, Lord is a title and also a form of address. It's true he didn't choose to use narrower terms like "Earl" or "Marquis." He probably just didn't want to get too bogged down in all these nitty gritty rankings and explaining how So-and-So got to be the Duke of Wherever. Once you break it, you bought it. He'd have to set up a complicated system of nobility ranking which could have even more complicated effects on the plot. He does have an example of a specialized title like the Lord of Dragonstone that goes to the crown prince under the Targaryens. Very much like the Prince of Wales is the title of the heir apparent in England. Now with noble women it's different. As long as Ned is alive, he is Lord Stark of Winterfell and no one else. Catelyn, Sansa, and Arya are all referred to as Lady no matter what. This is just the simplified system George chose to use. Westeros tends to evaluate nobility ranking based on how ancient a family name is and how well bred they are. Both Tully's and Starks are Lords Paramount, but Starks have the kingsblood and are older which adds a little more importance. And no, there's no evidence that granting lands means one has the right to make new nobles unless you are a king. All it means is you have a chunk of property you want to award someone for their service to keep them loyal to you. It could be as simple as a towerhouse on the boarders of your domain. It makes sense that a towerhouse would go to a knight for defensive purposes. Owning a towerhouse would indicate you are "somebody," but that doesn't mean you are equal to other nobles.
  2. Not quite like Varys. Lord Varys is definitely a courtesy title. The only powers he has are the ones that his job and the regime allows. Nestor Royce is of house Royce, an ancient First Men house that were once kings in the Vale. Unlike Varys, he does have noble pedigree and his branch of the family is considered a cadet branch. Cadet branches is where there is a gray area, but royalty is still involved. Under Lord Robb, Bran technically doesn't have a title of his own even if he's running a holdfast for Robb. If King Robb had lived to produce his own heirs that would inherit Winterfell, Bran could form a cadet branch of House Stark and have his own lordship if King Robb willed it so. Kinda like how Karstark of Karhold came to be, except at that time Starks were kings and could make that happen. That means somewhere along the line a younger male non-heir of the main House Royce ran a smaller piece of property connected to Runestone and started the cadet branch. Either it was made so while Royce's were kings or by the Arryn's who were also kings once. What we don't know is, what happened to that original piece of property and why doesn't Lord Nestor have an actual seat? Hell, where did they live before Jon Arryn appointed him steward and keeper of the Gates? It appears in other examples cadet branches go hand-in-hand with property. There's many possibilities as to why the cadet Royces don't have a castle of their own anymore. Maybe GRRM didn't think that fact was important or necessary to the plot or perhaps just didn't think of it at all. We're just supposed to accept it as a given. We are in agreement here, but I do think his pedigree means much as it helps get him appointed to his position. The Vale is a highly conservative region that really obsesses on ceremony, ancient bloodlines, and chivalric culture. They boast the strongest ties to the original Andals that came to Westeros. They don't appreciate nobodies overstepping, which is why it took LF winning the title of Lord of Harrenhal to be able to wed Lysa and he still had to make very generous bribes all over the Vale just to limit the opposition. The Lords Declarant were ready to boot him out for being upjumped no matter what Lysa wanted. They didn't even consider her "of the Vale" so her decisions didn't have to be law after she died. Serving the Arryns directly and acting as High Steward of the Vale would be a great honor and essentially make Nestor acting ruler of the Vale in Jon's absence. Hence why he felt so strongly that he was owed the Gates of the Moon as an inherited seat. So Lord Nestor is definitely not a nobody in social rank and his title isn't merely a courtesy. Jon Arryn wouldn't appoint someone to rule in his stead without considering the political and social ramifications. A choice from House Royce, some of the most powerful bannermen loyal to the Arryns would have been a natural choice and one the other lords would accept. Look how much maneuvering it took by LF just to mitigate the fear of Yohn Royce's wrath for supporting him. The Royce name carries a lot of weight, cadet or main branch. Well, now the area is very sparsely populated, but Ned's dream was to entice people in spring to go north and settle, increasing the population there. Very seldom would an opportunity like that arise. It would be the medieval version of getting in your Conestoga wagon and heading west to make your fortune. They would pay taxes to the NW, but that would only be a small portion of what they produce. Yes, they would be expected to defend against wildling raids, but honestly that threat appears to be greatly exaggerated in truth. It doesn't truly appear to happen that often or in a large scale. Perhaps "greatly" was too strong a word, but maybe not by much. There's still plenty of resources to be had even after taxes. 50 leagues south of the wall is still ~ 173ish miles and stretching across to the western mountains to the ocean. Lots of farm-able land. Even if there's not much in military might, food is still necessary for political, military, and economic power. Just ask the Tyrells. There's also potential for another port city on the Bay of Seals. It's certainly a significant land deal proposed by Ned Stark one that comes with having House Stark to thank and to kneel to, no matter who they technically pay their taxes to. And also it looks like in ADWD that defending against the wildlings is not going to be an issue in the future. The idea is now integration south of the Wall for mutual benefit and to fight against the Others. The Free Folk are going to be essential for humanity's survival. Admittedly, ADWD is my least favorite book and the one I spent the least amount of time with, so I'm taking your word for the Crown being reliant on the LP's. That doesn't actually surprise me. I don't think a centralized government was ever going to be sustainable long term in ruling an area roughly the size of South America with many differences regions and cultures using medieval technology. Especially when we're talking about the Lannister-Baratheon regime that is going to shit while patting itself on the back. Perhaps you missed me mentioning House Clegane. That's a landed knight house which is the exception. Any knight can make a knight. Knights are definitely higher on the totem pole than smallfolk, but well below nobility. Many Andal and a few First Men lords are knights, but not all knights are lords, and not all knights have land. So Tytos Lannister (who is also a knight, but would go by Lord instead of Ser) can take the kennelmaster's son to squire and knight him. House Clegane became landed knight's in the Hound's father's generation. The grandfather got the lands first though.
  3. We see plenty of examples of king's granting an inherited title, but is there an example of an LP or Highlord doing so? I mean someone who wasn't noble and is now noble because an LP or HL raised them up. It's definitely not the same as granting a piece of land to hold or run on the lord's behalf. And an inherited title is not the same as an appointed position for a specific job.
  4. I'm a little confused. Maybe I misread something along the way, because that quote actually aligns with granting lands, but not lordships. Lord Nestor was Lord Nestor before the business of Littlefinger granting him the Gates of the Moon in exchange for his support against Yohn Royce. Everyone calls him Lord Nestor. As head of a cadet branch of House Royce, he had a lordship title but no actual estate of his own. The Gates of the Moon is the winter residence of the Arryns, still owned by them up until LF changed that. Historically, it was the Arryn seat before the Eyrie was build. Every castle from the Bloody Gate all the way to the Eyrie is Arryn property. Lord Nestor was appointed the High Steward of the Vale and Keeper of the Gates of the Moon by Jon Arryn while he was in KL as Hand. These are appointed jobs serving at the Lord of the Eyrie's discretion, not inherited titles. So Lysa's dream of a little brother taking over stewardship of the Gates is consistent with the tradition of Arryn's appointing one of their own relatives to the position. So before Nestor Royce, there was probably an Arryn in the position before family members started whittling down leaving the job open to someone else. So getting the Gates of the Moon as an inherited piece of property makes Lord Nestor more like a typical lord, where he has an actual seat of his own which will pass to his son. His title alone gives him a pedigree, but the property grants him and his descendants power and wealth that can't be easily taken away like an appointment. That's what it means to be "a lord in truth" not just "in name." In order for a King to command loyalty and obedience from the nobility, he has to be able to confer special privileges that could be earned through winning his favor. Raising someone up to a peerage would be such a carrot on a stick. And what the king giveth, he can also take away. It keeps the high lords in check by rewarding them for good behavior and threatening them with attainment for bad. That power is diminished the more people claim that right. If high lords can grant lordship and all the privileges that come with it, then a vassal house doesn't owe any allegiance to a far away king. That's very bad for a king, especially in times of rebellion. He has nothing to leverage vassals into remaining loyal. Even if the king attains you, your best friend the Lord of Whatever can say "nah, I got you." I see what you are talking about there with the bolded about Ned's dream of settling the New Gift and I initially missed that while being focused on the tax question. Here's the thing. We're talking about multiple new lordships and houses in the far North. While they may theoretically pay taxes to the NW, their loyalty will be to House Stark, the hand that fed them. That's so much potential for new marriage alliances, food and resources, the ability to raise an even bigger army. It greatly expands the power of House Stark by extension. Now Ned is definitely loyal to King Robert and has a good relationship with him. It would still be highly prudent to seek royal permission for such a large scale land deal that comes with newly made nobility. One could imagine such a deal under the Targaryen regime would look worrisome if Ned just acted on his own; however, King Robert would not give a fig about boring farmsteads in the far North. I'm sure both Jon Arryn and Robert would also have a level of trust in Ned that he's not just making a self-serving power grab. We should also keep in mind there really is no actual plan to settle the Gift. What we're referring to is still just a "dream" of Ned's, one that would have to wait until spring has come again anyway. So the raising of new lords is still just a theoretical idea, but no outline of how Ned would actually go about doing it. The most likely scenario is that he proposes a list of new lords to the King, citing their record of service, worthiness, and how it would be beneficial to raise these people to noble status.
  5. I'm not sure if it's totally clear on the tax collection. We see mostly references to the Crown collecting taxes, but there's also these lines that say taxes can be paid directly to a lord or the NW. And it is acceptable to pay your taxes in the form of goods and services where some of those things would be impossible to transfer directly to the crown. So it would appear that lords do collect taxes from their smallfolk and vassals (with the exception of the Targaryen loyalists of Crackclaw Point) in whatever payment method. They would also collect rents from crofters working their lands as income. Then highlords would pay their share in gold to the Crown it would seem. This is only just one of many methods of tax income for the Crown. I don't think they can grant titles, just the land. Now as King Robb, he would have the power to grant Bran a new lordship. As Lord Robb, no. Bran wouldn't technically have a title of his own. Peasants tend to refer to any noble person as a lord, no matter if they are or not. But officially there is only one Lord of a house at a time. The exception would be knighthood as any knight can make a knight. Tytos (?) Lannister did this with his kennelmaster after he was saved from a lion. He gave them lands and took his son to squire, so in the next generation House Clegane became landed knights. Lord Nestor Royce already had the lordship title, but Littlefinger as Lord Protector gave him permanent rights to the Gates of the Moon as his seat. Before the Gates were owned by the Arryns and they appointed stewards. Stannis raised Davos up to a lord, but that was because he considered himself the rightful king with the power to do so. Appointing a new lordship title would be serious business that could have serious political implications. A king wouldn't want his subjects making their friends new lords as they pleased. Upward mobility in title was exceedingly rare and this is a system that is obsessed more with pedigree than wealth. It doesn't appear that there's any difference in actual power between a prince of Dorne and a LP. They just kept the title of prince and Dornish law as part of the deal of them coming into the Seven Kingdoms peaceably.
  6. Thank you! And this doesn't equal happily ever after. I do think George loves a good fairy tale, but he also wants to deconstruct it and rebuild it better. I do believe he is a romantic, but he's against portraying romance in fantasy in juvenile, overly idealistic ways. That's why he keeps the symbolic imagery in the background, not that they have an epic idealistic romance going on literally. What he actually has going on between them in the foreground are two people from different social statuses that have chemistry in spite of their differences, they stumble upon a level of intimacy and mutual support, but they also have issues between them. Problematic issues. Good! That's realistic! That's a story! Give them glaring faults on both sides that they challenge each other on. Let there be conflict! That makes their dynamic interesting and not sugary sweet. Not a harlequin paperback. Honestly, have you ever seen the 80's tv show of Beauty and the Beast George wrote for? OMG is it cheesy and saccharin. He even said he visualized Ron Perlman who played the beast on that show as a possible actor to portray Sandor. Terrible idea, but his mind was there. He does love that Cocteau movie very much and you are right he did specifically request that artwork based on the film. The beast's castle is also full of dog statues and not shy about the sexual imagery. Not just the dagger, but the lapping up of water from her cupped hands. I just think it's funny too how many people try to tell Sansa songs are stupid (and how many readers accept that as wisdom), but consider the sources: Littlefinger, Cersei, Tyrion (who is at that time mostly a rationalist, but still loves dragons), and Sandor when he's being his most jaded. It's like Jorah and LF mocking or disdaining Ned Stark's honor when Jorah and LF have no honor. While Sansa's belief in the songs and stories has definitely been recalibrated by harsh experience, she doesn't believe that they are all lies. Sometimes there are good people in the world who do extraordinarily good things that warrant a song written about them. That's true in real life. It's not common but it does happen. There actually are true knights in the series, Brienne being the best of them imo. Most knights will fall short in someway, but doesn't mean the ideals are stupid or worthless. The stories do mean something and they do set a high but not impossible standard. I like that Sansa pushes back against cynicism and nihilism. It's wise to understand how the world works and not have naive and simplistic ideas about how things ought to be, but it's also wrong to just accept things as they are and settle for it.
  7. Well that sure is inconvenient if he did that because he kinda needs her virginity to wed Sansa Stark to Harrold Hardyng. Annulling her marriage would be riding on some proof it was never consummated. Tyrion has failed to turn up dead and widow her as he had assumed would happen. There's not one thing that supports this idea.
  8. Well... considering he can't show his face outside the QI because he's already wanted for the Saltpans massacre, it's pretty safe to say he would be killed on sight. I don't think there's anyone in the Riverlands who is going to say "wait, let's give him a trial just in case there's more people that need to come forward about the Hound raping them." Brienne wasn't going to. Stoneheart certainly wouldn't. Lots of people would love to brag they slew the Hound. How exactly is Sansa going to accuse the Hound of raping her when she can't reveal her own identity because everyone believes still she murdered Joffrey? Highly unlikely she still has the bloody cloak. I've read the theory about dying it green; however, I think that idea only showed it could have been done, but no proof that it was actually true. I would think George would lay some more hints about it if it were such a significant object. Besides, that was a lot of blood on that cloak, way more than "wedding night" blood. If her injuries were extensive enough to cause that much blood, someone would have noticed. So there's a symbollic rape --> false memory of a "real" kiss (where she initially says she kissed him) ---> which is actually a repression of a "real" rape that is also a false memory underlying that ---> because Sansa was on some level picking up on the metaphors as the Blackwater was happening? She thought at that point the song was literal until the Marillion incident when she learned what it actually meant. I don't think anyone thought Marillion wanted to hear her "screams." As gross as he is, it was clear song = moans or sighs. Before that she was conceiving of a kiss only, not actual sex. It actually isn't a a symbolic rape because she had his dagger pressed against her. She could feel it but the dagger never broke her skin. She was never penetrated symbolically or otherwise. Ygritte, on the other hand, did get pricked by Jon's dagger and they ended up literally boning and no one took Jon for symbolically raping Ygritte. The only difference being that Jon was the virgin. Jaime's sword got blood on Brienne's thigh and they were in an actual brawl where one of them could have gotten seriously hurt or killed. No one read that as Jaime raping Brienne. All that scene's metaphoric elements describe is her simply not being ready. There's some "wetness" but she's also "dry" and "tight." Being "dry" doesn't mean the man is a rapist. Just means she needs more time and she's not ready to be penetrated by anyone. That's pretty much any woman. The bloody cloak and torn fabric comes after he's broken contact and leaving the room. Yeah, he can be full of shit too. All that posturing and blustering about the weak need to die and get out of the way of those that can protect themselves. If he truly believed that he wouldn't have tried to save Sansa in the riot and he wouldn't have bothered even looking for Lollys Stokeworth, which he did. So as long as he has his sword there's no man he need fear, which Sansa correctly thinking "except your brother." He does call himself a hypocrite for standing there in his white cloak while they beat her. Despite his hatred of knights, he does believe the white cloak stood for certain values that he fell short on. So if he's being honest about his intent to rape Sansa and wishes he did, why does he care then if Sansa was raped by Tyrion? Why does that idea set him sobbing? Like my biggest regret in life is the girl I wanted to rape getting raped by someone else? So if the unkiss is a genuine false memory, how then can she "lie?" You can't lie about something you honestly and sincerely believe is the truth to the best of your knowledge. And if he for sure intended to rape her, just "something" held him back for some unknown reason, then we shouldn't feel bad for him if he gets accused of it. I certainly don't feel that bad about Marillion's fate. He not only attempted a rape on Sansa, 3 servants were dismissed from the Eyrie for making allegations that he assaulted them, plus he was actively helping Aunt Crazy try to murder Sansa. It's not justice that he didn't get convicted of what he actually did, but I'm not moved to be sympathetic either. So if Sandor admits to killing Mycah and that he wanted to rape Sansa, I shouldn't feel that bad if she unwittingly "betrays" him with a false recounting of the Blackwater that she believes actually happened. If that happened, I'm not even sure he would even argue the point with her considering the guilt he feels with his dying words. And GRRM in interviews when asked about the unkiss has been highly evasive. He only keeps repeating that he used an unreliable narrator. There's one interview he's specifically asked about "Sansan" and he says "there's something there" and "I've played with that." The simplest explanation that I think will end up happening with the unkiss is that she puts the moves on him or kisses him, much to his shock because he left thinking that she couldn't bare to look at him still. That's how she told it the very first time: that she kissed him. Why do we need to jump to elaborate speculations about some sort of trial happening when it just might be that simple?
  9. So if in Alayne II, after her last incarnation of the unkiss, she says "That day is done." She stops thinking about it and as far as we can tell doesn't seem to think of it again. If this was her trauma coping mechanism and she has set it aside, doesn't that mean she's relieved of the trauma that plagued her? Like she's gotten closure? If she doesn't feel the need to hold on to it anymore, isn't that a good sign?
  10. Just a word about the metaphor dryness of her throat and the dagger = rapey. For women, even if you are enthusiastically consenting, if you are nervous it can result in dryness. Women typically require more time and preparation to be ready for sex. The opposite can also be true. A raped woman can experience wetness and orgasm purely as a physical response. Does not indicate she liked it. By contrast to Jon's dagger that pierced ygritte's skin, Sandor's dagger never did. So metaphorically Sansa was never penetrated. Lack of lubrication is not a definitive sign of the partner being unwanted. All it means is not being ready for sex, which of course she is not.
  11. This is part of an essay I've written. It's not the topic of the essay but it is one subsection. If we look at the final incarnation of the unkiss in Alayne II, I would suggest re-reading that entire scene in Robert's bedchamber and "zoom out." There's striking resemblances to the interaction between Robert and Sansa that closely parallels the Blackwater scene in Sansa's bedchamber. There's too much to quote, so I'm going to go over the parallels and re-read that section as you will. The difference is there is a role reversal where Sansa is taking control of the situation. Sweetrobin is playing the role of Sandor which is fitting as both are deeply wounded and frightened children. The scene opens, both Sandor and SR are lying in bed. There is a traumatic danger outside relevant to both of them. The wildfire outside one, the dangerous descent from the Eyrie that SR is avoiding. Both have childhood trauma. Sandor was burned. SR's mother was pushed through the Moon Door and he's afraid of falling like she did. Both have been humiliated. Sandor was called craven for leaving the battle and he was thereafter mocked for it. SR's own servants snigger and gossip about his babyish behavior. Sansa understands their trauma and reacts with compassion. Alayne shuts the heavy door of the bedchamber on the servants to prevent them from hearing their conversation and gossiping. She even firmly admonishes the squires and tells the servants basically "find something more productive to do" and stop eavesdropping. Sansa keep's Sandor's secret after he's gone. She treats them both with respect in protecting their privacy in their respective vulnerable states. Sandor goes to seek comfort from Sansa after he deserts. He desperately wants affirmation that he is brave, but he goes about it by calling Sansa afraid of everything. He's the one falling apart. She is someone who is willing to give compassion, but she doesn't like the inappropriate and aggressive manner in which he is seeking it. SR also wants comfort from Sansa for his anxieties. Sansa affirms that he is "brave" and "strong." SR doesn't want to admit he's afraid, he's only "choosing" not to go. In his fear, SR is also lashing out at people inappropriately like Mya Stone who only wish to help him. Sandor demands a song, specifically "Florian and Jonquil." A romantic song about a true knight and his lady. SR demands stories of Artys Arryn, the Winged Knight, that he often references in terms of bravery. Sansa finds Sandor's request irrational and inappropriate considering the battle outside. Sansa does promise SR more stories once they reach the bottom of the mountain, but his demands for more and more stories and lemoncakes is becoming excessive. In both scenarios Sansa is not unwilling to give either a song or a story. but it's the timing that is wrong and the way it is being asked for is too demanding. With Sandor she couldn't push back and set her own personal limits. With SR she sets firm limits on when and where she will give, with him meeting her half-way. He must get out of bed and get dressed. She also keeps her anger and frustration with SR's behavior in check, where Sandor had not. She only firmly corrects his behavior and sets limits. She thinks Sandor means to kiss her and later thinks that he did. SR culminates the scene by kissing Sansa and sparks the final incarnation of the unkiss. She tells him that he may kiss her again when they reach the Gates of the Moon, if he keeps his word. Sandor also made a promise that he failed to deliver on, that no one would hurt her again and he would keep her safe. He failed because he failed to see how his behavior was not safe at all until she snapped him out of it. So she would be willing to give a kiss for a promise kept. So if this entire scene can be read as a Blackwater redo, it's Sansa who is in control. She's willing to give in the relationship, but she also wants a say in when, where, and how. She wants her boundaries respected and she wants SR to give in return. She's taming SR's inappropriate behavior, not rejecting him. So we can say with the Blackwater, this is the way she would have preferred things to happen. To put it into context, Sansa is playing the role of the rescuer of SR who is in the tower. Where Colemon initially went to Lothor Brune to drag SR out of bed, Lothor Brune goes to Sansa to talk him out of bed "nice." By her method of dealing with SR, he makes the better choice on his own to get out of bed and get dressed for the decent. He wasn't drugged or forced for his own good, which would have further traumatized the boy. Sansa is showing the right way Sandor should have approached "rescuing" her from her own tower. @ravenous reader very well said!
  12. Exactly. She likes some of his ferocity, she just wants the volume to go from a 10 down to a 4 and directed act people who actually deserve it. She even imagines the Hound laughing when she tells Meryn Trant he's no true knight (that's the biggest insult in her mind). Like it's their private joke. That's the point, focusing his ferocity appropriately. She's willing to give in this dynamic, but she wants him to learn how to people properly also. Ask for things the right way at the right time. She said she was willing to sing a song for him "gladly." Her objection at the Blackwater was singing at an inappropriate time (the battle going on), not that she never wanted to sing for him ever. That's literal song btw, which was what he was asking for. He already knew she didn't understand the metaphor. He clearly doesn't see how irrational his request is in that moment. He accuses Sansa of cowardice, but he's the one falling apart at that moment. There's also a key difference here with other scary events. Sansa feels she can voice that he scares her sometimes and makes the demand that he let her go. She can tell him he's awful to his face. She doesn't do that with Joffrey or Littlefinger. She doesn't even feel safe enough to voice resistance with those two meaning she finds them way more dangerous. The hyper-vigilance to avoid saying anything that would set off an abuser isn't there with Sandor. The song she sings and the fact that it is successful in snapping him out of it shows her intuition regarding him is actually really spot on. She doesn't have to make it a conscious decision. So if somewhere within her she chose the appropriate song, she's got a better handle on him than he does on her. This tactic would never work on anyone else who is actively trying to make her suffer. It's directly reaching out to his better nature, so she does believe he is capable of being better than he claims.
  13. No. You forget that he was slowly and painfully dying of sepsis and preceding those statements he just flat out asked Arya to kill him. Give him the gift of mercy like they did for the wounded archer. She doesn't move. So then he tries to make her mad by bringing up Mycah. Then she realizes he's crying. The next thing he confesses is his personal failures toward her: standing there in his white cloak, taking the song that should have been given freely. If he's such an unrepentant rapist, why does he feel so much guilt? This is half-confessional and half-goading Arya to finish him. And this is all prompted after hearing from Gregor's men that Tyrion married Sansa, he proceeds to get very drunk in a highly volatile situation. He clearly believes he left her to a worse fate due to Tyrion's reputation for raping his wife. Why does the rapist care so much if his victim is raped by someone else? If he doesn't care about her consent, why didn't he just force her to leave with him? He could have. He's stronger. In fact, if his intent was to rape her, he doesn't in reality do anything sexual. No groping, no tearing her clothes, no just kissing her. There's nothing stopping him. Why the fuck is he just demanding a literal song? BTW even Jaime says rape is not something the Hound would do when he hears reports of the the Saltpans. Joffrey, Tyrion, Pycelle, Littlefinger have all groped her. Even her "hero" Ser Dontos tries to plant sloppy kisses on her. Nothing stopped them from doing so. I'm not arguing the moment wasn't frightening and his behavior was way out of line, but he is demanding the literal song because it's one personal thing he can have from her that does not do permanent damage. So Arya still doesn't move even after all that forcing him to just beg to kill him. The subtext of that is yes he wanted not just her physically but he wanted her heart too. He knows he royally fucked up the Blackwater by his behavior. No one is harder on Sandor than Sandor. It's why he was blacked out drunk and captured so easily by the BwB. He was suicidally depressed and just didn't care anymore if someone in the warzone came along and killed him. And as sweet said, Arya is the sister that is the way better judge of character. She had multiple opportunities to kill him and each one she refrained. She intuitively senses that his bark is worse than his bite. He may say awful things, but his actions don't support that he actually believes the things he says. As it turns out he doesn't even want gold in exchange for Arya. He wants to be in Robb's army, perhaps even a lordship. Why does he want to be in Robb's army except with the idea in mind that they will march on KL? Why does he want the lordship when he never even wanted knighthood? Hmmm... raise his social station, fight for her brother with the possibility of heading back to KL. To rescue her? To get a second chance where he screwed up the first time? It's the one possibility that gets him out of his depressed funk. That doesn't seem consistent with a rapist going through all this trouble. And just because someone goes through a frightening experience, does not automatically mean they are traumatized. Even before the first unkiss memory, she recalls the events of the Blackwater accurately and and with a critical eye for why it happened. Not excusing, she just understands what the underlying issue was. If she were traumatized, we should already see the signs of repressing it as this is over one month later. She can recall everything in factual detail and has no anxiety whatsoever when she is reliving that moment in her mind. That's not consistent with a typical PTSD response. And she keeps the cloak. People who have PTSD symptoms actively avoid associations with the traumatic event. This is all pre-false memory so it can't be argued she was repressing anything. She just recounted everything accurately. The idea that this was all about trauma and repression does not neatly satisfy every instance of her recollection. It doesn't fit all the facts. That assertion demands we completely ignore all of George's symbolic wife-stealing concept he heavily associated the scene with. That's not something Sansa would be aware of. If George wanted us to read it entirely as straightforward trauma, he should have not make it so heavily symbolic. He had alternatives. He could have written it not with a dagger, but say his hands around her neck. He could have written him literally doing something sexual to her. He would have written Sansa to be showing signs of PTSD right off the bat. Disassociation with all things related to the Hound, even on a subconscious level. Anxiety when reliving the event in her head. She would have automatic physical symptoms of being traumatized that would not be under her conscious control. If the trauma is buried somewhere in her subconscious, it should be showing itself spontaneously when triggered by an association. Her reaction to the old crippled dog in at the Fingers should be a triggering event. That's immediately following her supposed "nightmare" of the Hound. This doesn't make sense that George could be so thorough in describing Broken Men when it's the subject of the effects of men's trauma, but he would be so wildly unrealistic with the symptoms of Sansa's "trauma." He lived through the Vietnam War as a conscientious objector. Clearly describing men's trauma accurately was important to him. As sweet demonstrated, the Stockholm syndrome trauma-bonding doesn't apply in Sansa's case. If she's such a victim of a terrible trauma and her mind is trying to cope, there doesn't seem to be much compassion for a deeply traumatized 12 year old. If so it's the only coping mechanism available to her. She's still a prisoner with no support system who is continuously abused verbally, physically, and sexually. It does smack of victim blaming this frustration that she is somehow not strong enough to face reality when she can do nothing to change her situation at this time. This is really more about what people think Sansa ought to do and ought to feel. That it speaks to a doom and gloom future of her aligning with Littlefinger in his values. Since I don't believe that the unkiss is really about trauma, I think it speaks to her being more mentally strong than she even gives herself credit for. In her internal monolgue, she has more Stark identity thoughts than I think her other siblings have. She knows who she really is on the inside even if she can't show it. No one has broken her even after all she's been through.
  14. The point is... George is repeatedly hammering us with an association so that must mean it's important. We should probably pay attention to things we see over and over. Very specifically this dog-wolf juxtaposition happens in reference to Lady / Sandor. I'm sorry you don't get the idea of metaphor in literature and ravenous reader I think laid it out pretty well. If you don't see it, you don't see it. Very nice. I'll see your quote and raise you another! All 3 have associations with the Hound. If you recall, Sansa overheard the washerwomen gossiping and it involved the Hound (except she thought they were actually talking about fighting skill :
  15. Well it's not that wrong. He did earn the nickname "the late Walder Frey" for delaying entry into Robert's Rebellion until the outcome had largely been determined. If things had turned out differently, this whole debacle is a good reason to start building another fucking bridge so Walder Frey doesn't hold a monopoly on the crossing anymore. Yeah I'm not sure how well Walder could have been appeased. He holds on to every slight real or imagined forever. It doesn't help to give so much away either and lose his other bannermen in the process. There were no great solutions here, but Robb's already married and nothing to be done but offer up he best available options: the heir to Riverrun, Edmure and Arya. Catelyn even though to offer herself up if she had to. That's three marriages into paramount houses. It's not a king, but there could have been arrangements for any of Robb's heirs to marry a Frey. That would put them in the royal line in the next generation.