Jump to content

What I find strange about Lady's sacrifice


Grail King

Recommended Posts

I will say this, as far as "Sansa's a child". 11 is not 11 in this series. In fact it's nothing like 11 is in our world.

I agree, I don't find the age argument very convincing, about the only "child" that really acts his age in terms of maturity and development is Tommen. Bran, Arya, Sansa, Dany, Missandre, even the 'teenagers' Jon and Robb are mature far beyond anything approaching normal in real life. So, 'only a child' doesn't go to far in the series.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is one aspect of this incident that I haven't seen discussed and always wondered about. If Sansa had said what really did happen, then wouldn't she have been confirming that Arya struck Joffrey first so hard that it made him bleed? Isn't that a huge no no in this World in which striking the crown prince is a crime punishable by death? It doesn't matter if he deserved it. Sansa was very well aware of the social heirarchy that dominates her world. Jaime confirms this later when, while travelling with Brienne, he thinks about how Cersei had asked him to find Arya and cut off her hand and admits that he would have done that if he had found her first. So, Sansa confirming that Arya struck Joffrey first would have given Cersei all she needed to demand that, at a minimum, Arya's hand be cut off and at the worst have her killed. Maybe this was going through Sansa's mind when she pleaded the fifth.

Well, I've seen it discussed in two ways: 1. that Sansa did it all on purpose to save her sister and 2. that Sansa, by saying she didn't remember, she unwittingly saved her sister. I disagree with both.

I think it is clear from the text that there is no dispute in whether or not Arya hit Joffery, whether or not Nymeria bit Joffrey. Arya had already confessed, freely, that she did. We know that, because it's from Ned's POV. He hears Arya's story for the first time there, in court, and he knows she's telling the truth because he has heard the same version from Sansa. That is why he calls her, to confirm Arya's story. The dispute that is to be resolved is on who started it. Joffrey says Arya AND Mycah hit him without any provocation. Arya says a version close to what we've read in Sansa's chapter. Nobody claims that Arya didn't hit Joffrey.

If Arya was to be punished for hitting the crown prince regardless of her reasons to do so, there would be no reason to call Sansa to testify. The "aggressor" has already confessed and the "victim"'s body bears all evidence of the assault. But this is not the case, and as it seems, the who started it argument does matter, to Robert at least (Cersei couldn't care less). So, Sansa's stance, either unwittingly or on purpose, did not save Arya.

Sansa had three options: 1. to tell the truth and confirm Arya's story, 2. to lie and confirm Joffery's story or 3. to lie and say she didn't remember.

Option #1 would absolve Arya, would have Joffrey publicaly humiliated but not punished (at worst, they would beat that poor whipping boy) and, I suppose, there would be a requirement to do some semblance of justice for Mycah's death. Lady would have been killed no matter what, being a "wild beast public danger" and all. There would be other, indirect implications, but there is no point to speculate IMO.

Option #2 is out of the question, she would never do such a thing.

Sansa went for option #3 and we know the results. Yes, it did give Robert a way out, because coward as he was, all he wished for was for a way to "wash his hands" and deny to take the responsibility. In the first case, he would have to do something to save face as a king. It didn't absolve Arya of anything. But in any case, nothing in the text indicates that Sansa had Arya's safety in mind when she decided her stance in this "trial". Such a complex thought process, IMO, would be character defining and worth of -at least- a notion in Sansa's subsequent POVs. It would also be inconsistent with her later decision to disobey fer father and go to Cersei. She can't be capable of contingency analysis today and a naive little girl the day next.

* edited for spelling mistakes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree w/this post, except that I don't see Lady would have been killed either way, Cersei only thinks of Lady at the last minute when she sees that she has lost the ability to have Arya punished as she wanted. If Sansa told the truth...Joff was the aggressor and Nymeria attacked him to save Arya it seems very unlikely that Robert would have ordered another, random uninvolved direwolf killed to pacify his wife. This is why many people blame Sansa for getting her wolf killed. Robert admits he had forgotten about the wolf altogether and when his men say they cant' find Nymeria, he's ready to end the whole thing. If it had been confimred that his son was completely in the wrong and the aggressor he would not have ordered Lady killed in my opinion...so to me, that's on Sansa.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will say this, as far as "Sansa's a child". 11 is not 11 in this series. In fact it's nothing like 11 is in our world.

Yes it is. Sansa is a human being; and at the age of 11, she is still, emotionally, physiologically and mentally, a child. I have never thought that Bran Stark was written realistically; his thought patterns seem not just a year or two above his physical age, but several years. Sansa was also raised in a sheltered environment, and her naivete was encouraged. It is not really that naivete totally shatters with her father's execution by the boy she thought she loved that Sansa begins to grow up and grow up fast.

I always thought that Sansa's lie about not being able to remember events by the river was probably a fairly sudden and panicked reaction. Unless she was arguing with Arya (a sibling rivalry), Sansa had never tended to be a confrontational person, and acted to please and appease. Suddenly she's thrust in front of the King and Queen of Westeros, who are also her future in-laws, and expected to give testimony that will incriminate both her fiancee and her sister for different reasons; and I think Sansa got scared and took the path of least resistance, hoping to avoid conflict. I doubt she thought that Lady would be harmed; since Lady had not been involved at all; and Nymeria was gone anyway and would not be hurt. Sansa displayed very poor judgment, but I blame Joffrey (who was the major initiator of the whole mess and whose lie was far worse), Robert, Cersei, and Ned more than I blame Sansa.

A more disturbing tendency of Sansa's is to blur the truth in her own mind about past stressful events. For months she remembers Arya as having ruined her day with Joffrey - though that is also a product of Sansa's inability to see Joffrey for the piece of scum he actually was; it was easier for Sansa to blame everything on Arya than to believe her dream prince was a vicious thug. To some extent, this comes from Sansa's immaturity, and her having been over-sheltered and never having to face a serious conflict before.

I don't think Sansa has more of a tendency to lie than the other Stark children (except possibly for Robb). Sansa did not have much choice about lying after Ned's death in terms of agreeing that her family were traitors; not if she wanted to avoid beatings. If she had defied Littlefinger and told the Lords Declarant that it was Littlefinger, not Marillion, who murdered Lysa, then she would have lost her only protection against the powers in King's Landing who want her dead (Mace Tyrell as well as a furious Cersei). Arya lies all the time to preserve her own safety; even to the Kindly Man who asks her who she is and has offered to return her to Westeros (Arya prefers to be tutored in murder by the Faceless Men than to be sent back to Westeros, which, given her experiences, is understandable). Jon lies about the identities of two babies, one of whom he is trying to save and the other whose mother he forces to relinquish her son to save the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hogwash.

No it isn't. Sansa is far closer to Ned than Arya is and I don't see why that is a problem. As I stated earlier, Arya is much closer in her personality to Brandon and Lyanna rather than Ned. She's brash, wants to break out of her societies gender role (Ned says Lyanna might have carried a sword around had his father allowed her to), she's got a fiery temper. Obviously Arya has the wolf's blood, we all can agree on that. Ned has ice in his veins and really only ever loses his temper if he's under great stress or if he thinks an injustice is being committed.

I wouldn't say Sansa is essentially a young Ned Stark, but she mirrors his personality more than Arya.

I think i may have been wrong to say Arya is like Ned when she is more like Lyanna. Although i dont see how she is like Cat (smart and cunning isnt how i would describe Cat)

Yes Sansa built a snow castle but also went to Cersei as she never wanted to return North. Arya is constantly thinking about her brothers/home while Sansa is constatly thinking about knights/how people look. She has however changed as the series has gone on.

They do have the same blood but in my opinion are very different people. For me when i think of the North i think of Arya.

First of all Cat is smart she was just put in difficult positions. However Arya has Cat's vindictiveness and craving for vengeance, and Cat can be very stubborn.

Sansa went to Cersei in part because she was enamored with Joffery and she wanted to be the fricken queen of Westeros one day. While I think it was a very stupid thing to do and I can't understand why she did it, I don't think Sansa went to Cersei because she didn't want to go back to the North. There is a whole mess of other factors. Also Arya doesn't actually think of her family much more than Sansa. As soon as Ned hires Syrio, Arya rarely thinks of anything other than training. Similarly when Arya is training with the FM she doesn't reflect on her family constantly. Sansa starts to think more of her family when her whole future is destroyed...it's only natural and it doesn't prove anything.

I agree w/this post, except that I don't see Lady would have been killed either way, Cersei only thinks of Lady at the last minute when she sees that she has lost the ability to have Arya punished as she wanted. If Sansa told the truth...Joff was the aggressor and Nymeria attacked him to save Arya it seems very unlikely that Robert would have ordered another, random uninvolved direwolf killed to pacify his wife. This is why many people blame Sansa for getting her wolf killed. Robert admits he had forgotten about the wolf altogether and when his men say they cant' find Nymeria, he's ready to end the whole thing. If it had been confimred that his son was completely in the wrong and the aggressor he would not have ordered Lady killed in my opinion...so to me, that's on Sansa.

I think it's an interesting argument. Robert recognized that something was wrong with Joffery but I wonder if he would have stood up to Cersei even if Sansa told the truth. Robert is a coward in AGOT, he's gone soft and I don't know if he had the will to deal with Cersei.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree w/this post, except that I don't see Lady would have been killed either way, Cersei only thinks of Lady at the last minute when she sees that she has lost the ability to have Arya punished as she wanted. If Sansa told the truth...Joff was the aggressor and Nymeria attacked him to save Arya it seems very unlikely that Robert would have ordered another, random uninvolved direwolf killed to pacify his wife. This is why many people blame Sansa for getting her wolf killed. Robert admits he had forgotten about the wolf altogether and when his men say they cant' find Nymeria, he's ready to end the whole thing. If it had been confimred that his son was completely in the wrong and the aggressor he would not have ordered Lady killed in my opinion...so to me, that's on Sansa.

This is really flawed logic. Cersei wanted direwolves dead no matter what, she openly admitted it in Winterfell in Tyrion's first POV. She wanted blood and she wasn't going to settle for some peaceful resolution. Robert even had to remind her that he won't hurt Arya, and Jaime revealed that she sent him to chop Arya's hand, or even to kill her. Sansa telling the story wouldn't change one simple fact - Nymeria bit Joffrey, and she was considered wild animal. Why do you think Arya chased Nymeria off? If she was so sure she was right, Jory would tell her to bring the wolf with her. They both chased it away, for they knew there is no chance Nymeria would. Robert admitted that he had forgotten about damn wolf, but he also doesn't object when Cersei put a prize on the pelt. Robert and Cersei are all to blame for Lady's death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is really flawed logic. Cersei wanted direwolves dead no matter what, she openly admitted it in Winterfell in Tyrion's first POV. She wanted blood and she wasn't going to settle for some peaceful resolution. Robert even had to remind her that he won't hurt Arya, and Jaime revealed that she sent him to chop Arya's hand, or even to kill her. Sansa telling the story wouldn't change one simple fact - Nymeria bit Joffrey, and she was considered wild animal. Why do you think Arya chased Nymeria off? If she was so sure she was right, Jory would tell her to bring the wolf with her. They both chased it away, for they knew there is no chance Nymeria would. Robert admitted that he had forgotten about damn wolf, but he also doesn't object when Cersei put a prize on the pelt. Robert and Cersei are all to blame for Lady's death.

The argument generally is that Sansa telling the truth would have given Robert sufficient moral ground to stand on to tell Cersei to go to hell at Ned's request. But with Sansa not telling the truth, Robert lost that resolve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The argument generally is that Sansa telling the truth would have given Robert sufficient moral ground to stand on to tell Cersei to go to hell at Ned's request. But with Sansa not telling the truth, Robert lost that resolve.

Robert was well aware that Joffrey was lying, he admitted it to Ned at the Hand's tourney. Plus, what kind of person turns his back to a pleading 11 year-old girl that will one day become your daughter-in-law? I think that Lady's death showed how deprived of any courage Robert truly is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert was well aware that Joffrey was lying, he admitted it to Ned at the Hand's tourney. Plus, what kind of person turns his back to a pleading 11 year-old girl that will one day become your daughter-in-law? I think that Lady's death showed how deprived of any courage Robert truly is.

Indeed. Robert at the time of the books was a loser. But it would have been easier for that loser to back Ned in front of the assembled crowd had Sansa described Joffrey's cowardice truthfully. Then the likes of Renly and other bystanders (I can't recall who it was that laughed at Arya throwing Joffrey's sword in the river, I seem to think it was Renly) would have japed even more during the proceedings, bolstering Robert's emotional position and giving him the moral ammunitition to support Ned's request.

If Robert was a better man, that would not have been necessary, but seeing as he was a drunken weakling by this time, Sansa's honest description of events would have made all the difference to the situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is really flawed logic. Cersei wanted direwolves dead no matter what, she openly admitted it in Winterfell in Tyrion's first POV. She wanted blood and she wasn't going to settle for some peaceful resolution. Robert even had to remind her that he won't hurt Arya, and Jaime revealed that she sent him to chop Arya's hand, or even to kill her. Sansa telling the story wouldn't change one simple fact - Nymeria bit Joffrey, and she was considered wild animal. Why do you think Arya chased Nymeria off? If she was so sure she was right, Jory would tell her to bring the wolf with her. They both chased it away, for they knew there is no chance Nymeria would. Robert admitted that he had forgotten about damn wolf, but he also doesn't object when Cersei put a prize on the pelt. Robert and Cersei are all to blame for Lady's death.

Yes, of course if Robert's men had found Nymeria he would have had the wolf killed, that's not in question.

The question is,would he have had Lady killed, the wolf that is tied up, who hasn't bitten anyone if it was made clear that wolf that did bite someone did it to defend he rmistress. And I don't think so....when he's told his men can' find Nymeria, he doesn't tell them keep looking, he's ready to forget it, let's move on and this is with him not even knowing the truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes it is. Sansa is a human being; and at the age of 11, she is still, emotionally, physiologically and mentally, a child.

Horseshit. Even an 11 year old here isn't the same as an 11 year old "here". It depends on the culture and context in which one is brought up. I don't care what the official physiological data are. Culture is crucial in saying when someone is a child or not. An 11 year old is hardly a child in this culture. They aren't treated like children, they aren't written about like children. They shouldn't be excused on the basis of being children.

And Sansa is nothing like Ned. I've read that over and over on here. Ned said what he thought at every opportunity. He stood up for what was right - at every opportunity. Ned was intensely moral, outspoken, and honest. He spoke his mind and did what was right even at the cost of his own life. I see no parallel whatsoever in Sansa's behavior. She does precisely the OPPOSITE all throughout the series, saying whatever will keep her alive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

........

And Sansa is nothing like Ned. I've read that over and over on here. Ned said what he thought at every opportunity. He stood up for what was right - at every opportunity. Ned was intensely moral, outspoken, and honest. He spoke his mind and did what was right even at the cost of his own life. I see no parallel whatsoever in Sansa's behavior. She does precisely the OPPOSITE all throughout the series, saying whatever will keep her alive.

Except that Ned knew the truth of what happened. Sansa told he before they found Arya. He knew the truth, and didn't make Sansa tell it. Why, because it could have cost Arya her life. Robert may of never wanted to hurt a child, but Cersei would. Ned isn't stupid. The whole pleading of the 5th was planned. That's why he quiet Arya when she pounded her sister for lying. He didn't make Sansa tell what he knew happened. They really never thought Lady was in danger. Nymeria was gone, so with Sansa pleading the 5th there was no just way for Cersei to for blood. Lady was just unfair. Ned even calls Robert on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sansa went for option #3 and we know the results. Yes, it did give Robert a way out, because coward as he was, all he wished for was for a way to "wash his hands" and deny to take the responsibility. In the first case, he would have to do something to save face as a king. It didn't absolve Arya of anything. But in any case, nothing in the text indicates that Sansa had Arya's safety in mind when she decided her stance in this "trial". Such a complex thought process, IMO, would be character defining and worth of -at least- a notion in Sansa's subsequent POVs. It would also be inconsistent with her later decision to disobey fer father and go to Cersei. She can't be capable of contingency analysis today and a naive little girl the day next.

* edited for spelling mistakes

I haven't seen this discussed much before so thanks for addressing my post with some thoughtful arguments that make some good points. I have thought about this myself some and I don't disagree with much of what you are saying, as it applies to a conscious thought on Sansa's part to say she didn't remember. But I don't see how it could be conscious. As you say, there's nothing in the text to show that she consciously thought of it and doing so would be inconsistent with her later thoughts. But this doesn't address unconscious influences and it's made very clear that Sansa's upbringing since the day she was born was to learn about social graces and hierarchy etc. and she excelled at that. Also, we readers know that it did not and could not absolve Arya of anything but we have been watching the whole thing from Ned's POV before Sansa was even brought in. We have no way of knowing what information Sansa was given about the trial before being dragged into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed. Robert at the time of the books was a loser. But it would have been easier for that loser to back Ned in front of the assembled crowd had Sansa described Joffrey's cowardice truthfully. Then the likes of Renly and other bystanders (I can't recall who it was that laughed at Arya throwing Joffrey's sword in the river, I seem to think it was Renly) would have japed even more during the proceedings, bolstering Robert's emotional position and giving him the moral ammunitition to support Ned's request.

If Robert was a better man, that would not have been necessary, but seeing as he was a drunken weakling by this time, Sansa's honest description of events would have made all the difference to the situation.

Problem was that Renly was thrown away, and that entire room was filled with Lannister soldiers who would backed up Cersei and Joffrey. All in all, Sansa telling the truth would have change nothing. Cersei wanted blood, and Robert was such a coward, that it ended just the same.

Yes, of course if Robert's men had found Nymeria he would have had the wolf killed, that's not in question.

The question is,would he have had Lady killed, the wolf that is tied up, who hasn't bitten anyone if it was made clear that wolf that did bite someone did it to defend he rmistress. And I don't think so....when he's told his men can' find Nymeria, he doesn't tell them keep looking, he's ready to forget it, let's move on and this is with him not even knowing the truth.

I think he knew all along that Lady didn't bit anyone, plus Nymeria didn't attack Joffrey because Arya told her to do so, she did it instinctively. And let we not forget what he said to Ned about direwolves. This is not some usual animal... In Robert's eyes, direwolf was a dangerous animal. Yes, he was ready to put whole incident aside, but you have to count on Cersei who wanted blood. And then we come to those persons who actually killed Lady.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Robert was a better man, that would not have been necessary, but seeing as he was a drunken weakling by this time, Sansa's honest description of events would have made all the difference to the situation.

Sansa had to plead the 5th or Arya could have at the least lost a hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Problem was that Renly was thrown away, and that entire room was filled with Lannister soldiers who would backed up Cersei and Joffrey. All in all, Sansa telling the truth would have change nothing. Cersei wanted blood, and Robert was such a coward, that it ended just the same.

I think he knew all along that Lady didn't bit anyone, plus Nymeria didn't attack Joffrey because Arya told her to do so, she did it instinctively. And let we not forget what he said to Ned about direwolves. This is not some usual animal... In Robert's eyes, direwolf was a dangerous animal. Yes, he was ready to put whole incident aside, but you have to count on Cersei who wanted blood. And then we come to those persons who actually killed Lady.

LOL, yes, of course he knows Lady didn't bite anyone. He says the wolves are too dangerous to have as a pet because thats his own rationalization for why he is ordering the killing of a wolf that has not bitten anyone or misbehaved in any manner. He's lying to himself, as is his tendency.

It doesn't matter what Cersei wanted, Cersei did not always have her way with Robert. The very reason she is so opposed to Ned is because she knows that with Ned there to bolster him up and appeal to his better nature that she is going to have her way less and less. That's what killing Lady is about anyway, a stupid power play on Cersei's part.

We can agree to disagree here. I believe if Sansa had told the truth that this would have given Robert more than enough reason to refuse her demand and Lady would not have been needless killed....since he doesn't show any interest in having Nymeria killed, or in punishing Arya, he would have looked for an excuse to NOT do it and the truth would have provided it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sansa had to plead the 5th or Arya could have at the least lost a hand.

There is no way in hell that Robert Baratheon would have harmed Ned's daughter for hitting his son, who he doesn't even like and can't in his heart of hearts even believe is his own--which of course, LOL, he isn't. That was never even on the table in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Falcons and Hawks are very similar so sure... I haven't seen Falconry mentioned in the books so they may use "hawking" for the activity, whether they're using hawks or falcons. Nowadays we only use Falconry even when using hawks because "hawking" has developed to mean selling garbage on the street.

I'd agree, supposedly they do lose their powers for their second life.

When she's with Margery in HG Sansa is using a Peregrine Falcon for hawking, can't remember the chapter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...