Unreliable Narration

[Creepy Doll]

In the case of a PoV heavy story like A Song of Ice and Fire, there has always been a nagging question when it comes to observing the stories through the eyes of specific archetypes. The one instance of unreliable narration that comes to mind for me is during Sansa's chapters in which she misremembers a kiss between her and The Hound. She is PoV character that is arguably one of the most narration driven stories, in the sense that all Sansa tends to do in her chapters is observe her surroundings and reflect upon what she sees. The question then becomes, what purpose does an unreliable narrator serve for an isolated point of view?

In each of Sansa's chapters, it is very rare that we are allowed a chance for another PoV character to observe her, I believe one of the first times that we are ever given this outside perspective of Sansa is through Tyrion's eyes. In my opinion though, this perspective we see from Tyrion is not an accurate portrayal of Sansa, because he accepts her mask of surviving King's Landing as reality, he truly believes her to be a dutiful, naive child bride, disgusted by his looks.

An example of Tyrion's unreliable observations: "Her own eyes were big and blue and empty. 'I shall go wherever my lord husband wishes.'" - - "What a pathetic little man you are. Did you think babbling about the Lion's Mouth would make her smile? When have you ever made a woman smile but with gold?" - - "He knew what she was seeing; the swollen brutish brow, the raw stump of his nose, his crooked pink scar and mismatched eyes."

Each of Tyrion's thoughts as to why she is cold and shielding herself in courtesy, are from his own insecurities of his appearance, where in this same scene or timeframe we do get to see some reflections from Sansa earlier, in which she says....

"Is this some Lannister trap to make me speak treason?" - - "What does he want me to say? He wanted something from her but Sansa did not know what it was. He looks like a starving child but I have no food to give him. Why won't he leave me be?"

This to me, speaks more about her disdain for the fact that they have made her a Lannister(another of her reflections) and less about Tyrion's appearance. She misreads his attempts at establishing a connection because she is blinded by the fact that Tyrion is meant to be one of them, just as he is blinded by the fact that Sansa is always on guard, not because he is ugly to her, but because he's Lannister.

In those examples, it's a miscommunication but ultimately unreliable narration on both of their ends because they have an archetype of unreliable narration in the form of The Naïf. Both Tyrion and Sansa have a limited point of view in their perceptions of others as narrators, because they tend to be naïve, Tyrion when it comes to women, and Sansa when it comes to people's motivations.

The larger problem that I have with this though, is that The Naïf has an inexperienced outlook and perception but they don't tend to make things up. So why is it a major literary element being used now with Sansa, for her to have made an event up entirely? Which is something that falls more in line with a dangerously unreliable narrator, who is mentally unstable(i.e. A madman/madwoman) due to either mental disassociation from traumatic experiences, or from mental illness like paranoia or schizophrenia. The madman archetype to me is dangerous because it has the chance of causing an audience/readers to discredit or doubt all of a narrator's observations, creating questions like "If they've made this up, then what else?"

What do you guys believe? Do you think that G.R.R.M is trying to place Sansa's narration more in the line of unreliability due to mental instability or PTSD mental disassociation?

 

[Lady Barbrey]

I really like how you've compared Tyrion and Sansa's POV's of a similar incident. That said, I'm not sure I would call this unreliable narration as we as readers are quite aware that these are character nterpretations. Tyrion often, almost always in fact, is hyper aware of his own ugliness and interprets through that framework. It's to the point that we as readers can see his interpretive framework is more of a handicap to him sometimes than his actual personal appearance is. Sansa has learned to distrust almost everyone, but in her case we want her to do that (especially the one she still seems to trust, Littlefinger), and can't blame her for not trusting people we know she might be able to trust, like Tyrion. 

So these are not unreliable narrations to me, they're skillfully built (by Martin) character filters. 

As for the unkiss, that does seem to indicate an unreliable narrator. It's the only factual instance I can think of in the book, though. Perhaps there will be more. If it was not just something that got missed in editing, I can think of a few reasons for it:

1) In hindsight, Sansa has romanticized the encounter. Very possible and most likely in my view. 

2) PTSD, as you say, has messed up her memories. Less likely. 

3) These POV's - all of them - are stored in the weir network, Bran has access to them, and gone back in time to tweak memories of events to lead to a different outcome. Possible. If we see more memory slips like this in the coming events, I would up the chances something like this is happening. 

[YouKnowNothingJonSnow]

Inherent to any POV style, ANY/EVERY POV can be unreliable to a certain extent. Everyone carries there own biases and experiences with them. It can cause two people to view an identical scene (or hear an identical phrase) and have two very different takes on it.

Happens all the time with eyewitnesses. Eyewitness account are one of the most unreliable pieces of evidence at a trial. Not because people lie, but because they take different things from the same encounter. When this happens, witness accounts may differ.

One person can make an statement. Some will view it as innocuous. Others will hear dog whistles of a sort: racist, sexist, anti-Semitic, anti-religious, anti-LGBT, etc. Some would chalk it up to poor phrasing while others would assume intent.

Tyrion has a complex about his appearance (with good reason) so he seems to think most view him first and foremost as a grotesque. Especially women. So he analyzes a lot of interactions through the lens of his appearance, especially with newly acquainted women.

Still, a very interesting observation. And one readers should take note of. Just because a POV character believes or perceives something, it doesn't make it true.

 

 

[Creepy Doll]

11 minutes ago, Lady Barbrey said:

3) These POV's - all of them - are stored in the weir network, Bran has access to them, and gone back in time to tweak memories of events to lead to a different outcome. Possible. If we see more memory slips like this in the coming events, I would up the chances something like this is happening. 

Now this is something new to me, I haven't seen this theorized yet. I actually really hope that something like this happens in some of Bran's upcoming chapters from Winds/Dream. Even just seeing glimpses of what we as readers know to be true events, linked with maybe something that happened in the same scene but our PoV characters at the time were unaware of. (Things like maybe Bran recalling Olenna fussing with Sansa's hairnet, but Bran observing Olenna taking a stone, where Sansa did not at the time it happened.) 

Also, I totally understand where you are coming from when you mention that we as readers interpret the naïve observations from the characters as being interpretations or their perception in story, but I do still think that it is a more complex literary element/character archetype being explored when events we know as readers(such as unkiss) are not true. Whether Sansa has romanticized The Hound or something else, my point was that things that we know did not take place, are coming into memory collection in her chapters now.

As far as it being maybe an editing flaw, I believe G.R.R.M himself has confronted this question and flat-out claims that Sansa is an unreliable narrator. And it's not just about the UnKiss, but rather a couple intentional instances of Sansa being written to misremember events/details. http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/2999/

[Lady Barbrey]

2 hours ago, Creepy Doll said:

Now this is something new to me, I haven't seen this theorized yet. I actually really hope that something like this happens in some of Bran's upcoming chapters from Winds/Dream. Even just seeing glimpses of what we as readers know to be true events, linked with maybe something that happened in the same scene but our PoV characters at the time were unaware of. (Things like maybe Bran recalling Olenna fussing with Sansa's hairnet, but Bran observing Olenna taking a stone, where Sansa did not at the time it happened.) 

Also, I totally understand where you are coming from when you mention that we as readers interpret the naïve observations from the characters as being interpretations or their perception in story, but I do still think that it is a more complex literary element/character archetype being explored when events we know as readers(such as unkiss) are not true. Whether Sansa has romanticized The Hound or something else, my point was that things that we know did not take place, are coming into memory collection in her chapters now.

As far as it being maybe an editing flaw, I believe G.R.R.M himself has confronted this question and flat-out claims that Sansa is an unreliable narrator. And it's not just about the UnKiss, but rather a couple intentional instances of Sansa being written to misremember events/details. http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/2999/

Thanks for the link. It's all very interesting, isn't it?  As far as I know, I'm the only one who has posited the POVs as memory fragments in the weir network that Bran might one day have access to, and moreover be able to tweak. I posted it as an answer over on Quora. However, it's doubtful no one has thought of it before and posted here, because it addresses a framing technique of the entire series, in other words it's a rationale for the multiple POV structure. The weir network, as we've seen, is a repository for memories. So it just makes sense that the memories of the POV characters -and that's what each section is - are part of that repository. Martin might not use this at all. He doesn't have to, but as a writer myself I can guarantee he thought about it!

In connection to this, I noticed something curious that is hard to explain without going into my monster theory on a mirror history in the World book. So I'll just state it without the long explanation and quotes I need to prove it. Stripped of its Asian trappings, Yi Ti and lands to the east reflect an unexact but close mirrored history/future and upside down geography, of Westeros with the North partly underwater.  (In this alternate history, the Greyjoys/Others win but all the other major players are once more gathered as threats).

One story in that section is about a Yi Ti Scarlet Emperor who wars with the Jogos Nhai. According to my God Emperors of Westeros key, Scarlet Emperors are Targaryans and the Jogos Nhai are the Dornish. The Emperor in question is Daeron the Young Dragon who tried to conquer Dorne - the similarities are fairly obvious (though not exact) once that connection is made. The section ends abruptly by saying this man was the last of the Scarlet Emperors (Targaryans). 

But in Westeros that was not the case. Daeron was succeeded by his brother Baelor.  Apart from the minor bits and pieces of exotic beasts and Asian trappings, this was the only major piece that didn't fit into my whole extended theory. 

So to me I wondered what had happened after Daeron's reign when Baelor took over that meant the end of the real Targaryans. I couldn't find anything definitive. But this is where the history of real Westeros departs from this mirrored history. A split of some kind happens. 

We therefore have two histories, one in which Targaryan rule ends with Daeron, and mirrored Westeros is eventually flooded in the north and ruled by the Greyjoys/Others, and another where the Targaryan line continues in real Westeros until Robert's Rebellion and we don't yet know how it ends. 

After I posted some of this LmL said something really interesting to me he had noted as standing out. It's when Sam goes to Oldtown. He is a little lost and comes upon a statue of Daeron the Young Dragon. The path splits. Sam has to make a decision about which path to follow. And thereby changes history?

Lol!  I don't know. But it seemed so weird to me that Daeron the Young Dragon figured in two places where things ... Split. 

To get back to your question then: it could be that at some point in Sansa's plot trajectory, something was tweaked by Bran (or someone/something else), or a choice was made, and Sansa's path also ... Split. So she is now following a different history, one in which the kiss actually happened or she remembers it having happened. 

I know, this messes with my brain. 

[The Weirwoods Eyes]

I think we always have to take each POV's interpretation with a pinch of salt, everyone views the world with their own prejudices, wants, needs and experiences. Tyrion is an excellent example. Just look at his "relationship" with Shae. we are sympathetic to him in this situation, because we viewed the entire relationship from his mind, but when you stop and examine their interactions with her perspective in mind, the story is very different. Tyrion see's them as being in love, he absolutely convinces himself she wants him and desires him. But the truth is very different. We don't hold Tyrion to account for his bad behaviour towards women at first because we experience it all from his POV. Try telling a die hard Tyrion fan that he raped that girl in Selhorys and you will find out just how much being in a characters head twists the readers perception of events.

Sansa has made up the UnKiss, and as a reader we know this never actually happened. We do however experience her construction of the false memory first hand-we are in her head. And so can understand the why of it. Sansa is an adolescent girl who is going through her sexual awakening, but she lives in a world where exploring her sexuality is a dangerous business. So she turns to fantasy. And even though society has a very specific type of man in mind for Sansa, she clearly desires something else. So she places him (Sandor) in her marriage bed in her dreams, and she indulges in a full on fantasy of him kissing her, we see the level of wickedness; meant in the sexual sense,this fantasy incites in her when she imagines telling the prim Tyrell girls that she has kissed The Hound!

How scandalous!!!

The other event in which GRRM uses false narrator is the Sword

here's the SSM. 

[GRRM is asked about Sansa misremembering the name of Joffrey's sword.]

The Lion's Paw / Lion's Tooth business, on the other hand, is intentional. A small touch of the unreliable narrator. I was trying to establish that the memories of my viewpoint characters are not infallible. Sansa is simply remembering it wrong. A very minor thing (you are the only one to catch it to date), but it was meant to set the stage for a much more important lapse in memory. You will see, in A STORM OF SWORDS and later volumes, that Sansa remembers the Hound kissing her the night he came to her bedroom... but if you look at the scene, he never does. That will eventually mean something, but just now it's a subtle touch, something most of the readers may not even pick up on.

As you can see when read in context this is not some great hint that Sansa is herself mentally deranged. Just that as with everyone she is subject to the odd lapse in memory. A swords name is hardly proof she is loosing her mind. 

And he tells us he's setting up the UnKiss. Which he then tells us will be important, why? because it is a huge part of Sansa's journey into autonomy, she is recognising that she has her own desires here. This is a girl whose Septa raised her to find the Beauty in any man, that was a lesson about arranged marriage. That she has no choice in who she marries and so must endeavour to find something to love in whoever he is. We see her trying to do this, and we hear her internal monologue recognising that this can be very difficult. We even have her deciding for herself that Septa Mordane was full of shit, but can see she hasn't quite let go of her training in Alayne.

Spoiler

When she thinks that Robert Aryn's future wife will at least like his lovely hair. "  He does have pretty hair.  If the gods are good and he lives long enough to wed, his wife will admire his hair, surely.  That much she will love about him.  "

It is a journey, she has allowed herself to have a sexual fantasy about The Hound, but she has not yet acknowledged consciously that she wants him, or even truly that she has a right to her own sexual desire at all.  She's slowly opening up her own desires, and it is no coincidence that in the Vale she is paired with a sexually experiences salacious older girl who thinks nothing of talking about fucking and cock. Sansa's story is in large about taking her fate in her own hands, having autonomy over whom she marries or if she does at all is part of that. We see her dallying with political matches, but also thinking still she wishes to be wanted for herself, loved even. She is weighing her desire for home and Winterfell, against her wish to be loved for herself. 

Her false memory of the UnKiss is all about her subconscious desires beginning to surface, and her exploring what and who she really wants. It isn't the only clue as to who that is either, she compares all men to Sandor, she recalls him constantly, dreams about him in her bed etc. 

What I think is important to remember is that All  the POV's have a bias, everyone views the world through their eyes. Cersei views herself way more competent than she really is and we see through her POV that she is massively narcissistic, Jaime is clouded by his shame and conflict over the events during the last days of RR. And much of what he see's as motivation in others is coloured by that. people are all dishonourable, untrustworthy, self serving, and he has failed as a knight. That is being played out against the backdrop of his fathers legacy  and his own sense of duty to the crown. His son. He will eventually conclude his dad was an arsehole, and once his son and daughter are both dead, all loyalty to the crown and the Lannisters will be gone. He will be free to pursue the redemption he wants so desperately.What we see and think of other characters is effected by all that conflict within him.

It's super evident in Tyrion's so much so that I think if I started typing the post would double in size.

If we were to take what Arya thinks in her head during her Riverlands jaunt as true, we'd be assuming Catelyn was so cold a mother that she would reject her, because of her actions & deeds. Which we know, because we are also in cat's head is untrue. We know through the benefit of having both POV's that Cat in fact is desperate to see Arya and distraught at her disappearance. 

This was an early lesson in not trusting a POV entirely, and as the book progress we can see more clearly just how biased each character is, and this is why it is important to read the story as a whole, considering everyone's POV's and making our own map of events. take Sam & Jon's duel telling of the events at teh wall when he(Jon) informs Sam that he wants him and Gilly to leave for Old Town via Braavos. the same events but slightly different dependant upon whose POV you are in. 

 

[sweetsunray]

Tyrion considers Sansa to be the child in the marriage, but in many ways Tyrion acts like a needy child to Sansa – as if he constantly desires a reassuring pat on the shoulder and a cookie for good behavior from her. And Tyrion already shows this need for reassurance from Sansa during the wedding night. It is this show of need from him that makes her look at her hands, feel pity and unable to find aything attractive in him.

Tyrion shares something personal with Sansa: the first time he was wed. Who was the septon, animals being the witnesses to it, and later the meal of their feast, and how Tysha and he fell laughing in bed. Sansa cannot but be curious. But when she asks about it, Tyrion replies sarcastically and self-deprecating, and she shuts up. They do not connect intellectually. Next, Sansa starts to undress and feels vulnerable, and recognizes Tyrion seems afraid too. But he present himself as someone to be pitied for his deformities. He basically messages her: if you pity me for my looks and give me a chance, I can be good for you. She does pity him, but pity is death to desire. Finally she sees him fully naked, at her feet, supplicating and making it her choice, though he clearly is aroused. Without the emotional and intellectual chemistry, Tyrion's chance of having physical chemistry with Sansa are zero while he looks grotesquely. 

And it is quite revealing to read the wedding night in comparison to Sandor walking Sansa home after the tourney. That scene too includes sharing, fear, vulnerability. Sandor even hunkers down at her feet, not to beg anything from her, but to hide after he revealed the cause of his burns. He is cynical, though not sarcastic. But it has slightly different impact on Sansa with far reaching different results: empathy instead of pity. Sandor does not want her reassurance or a pat on the shoulder, but he wants to connect with her emotionally and intellecutally nonetheless. Even when he scoffs and laughs at her words, it remains an emotional and intellectual exchange that he does not want to break off and where he challenges her. He maintains physical contact with her, and she with him.

Hence there is chemistry with Sandor and none with Tyrion.  

Sandor's Unkiss is not the sole unreliable memory of Sansa. In her POV we see the incident at Ruby's Ford. In her POV we later witness a discussion between Arya and Sansa during breakfast over Mycah. Sansa never saw Mycah attack the prince, but several months later that is exactly what she claims happened, in order to defend the Hound as not being counted amongst the monsters such as Jaime and Gregor. In that same POV chapter Ned tells Sansa that he will find a high lord as a husband for her. In her later POV in front of the remaining small council she claims her father wanted to wed her to a hedge knight. Sansa's not un unrealiable narrator, because she does objectively report what people say and do when it happens. But she has an unreliable memory afterwards. She often alters her memory of events and what was said after it happened, in relation to her own desires. And what she desires is heavily linked to her sexual maturation and experimenting with it in a fantasy world. It's the sole place where she can safely experiment, at her own terms and her own time when she feels she's ready for it.

And that is the purpose imo of the unreliable narration in an isolated POV: it allows for character growth and development and coming off age within that POV, and to show the reader how that character accomplishes it internally, regardless of the desires of or pressure from others. The Unkiss shows Sansa's internal maturation isolated from what currently is happening around her, and it makes her an independent agent. 

[Isobel Harper]

I disagree that the UnKiss stems from Sansa wanting the Hound romantically.  She does care for him, but platonically.  (If you disagree with me, you might want to move to the last paragraph, which is the meat of my point anyway.)

Before she could summon the servants, however, Sweetrobin threw his skinny arms around her and kissed her. It was a little boy's kiss, and clumsy. Everything Robert Arryn did was clumsy. If I close my eyes I can pretend he is the Knight of Flowers. Ser Loras had given Sansa Stark a red rose once, but he had never kissed her . . . and no Tyrell would ever kiss Alayne Stone. Pretty as she was, she had been born on the wrong side of the blanket.

As the boy's lips touched her own she found herself thinking of another kiss. She could still remember how it felt, when his cruel mouth pressed down on her own. He had come to Sansa in the darkness as green fire filled the sky. He took a song and a kiss, and left me nothing but a bloody cloak.

I believe the Loras fantasy and the Hound "memory" parallels Baelish as seen in this scene just two chapters prior.

He saved Alayne, his daughter, a voice within her whispered. But she was Sansa too . . . and sometimes it seemed to her that the Lord Protector was two people as well. He was Petyr, her protector, warm and funny and gentle . . . but he was also Littlefinger, the lord she'd known at King's Landing, smiling slyly and stroking his beard as he whispered in Queen Cersei's ear. And Littlefinger was no friend of hers. When Joff had her beaten, the Imp defended her, not Littlefinger. When the mob sought to rape her, the Hound carried her to safety, not Littlefinger. When the Lannisters wed her to Tyrion against her will, Ser Garlan the Gallant gave her comfort, not Littlefinger. Littlefinger never lifted so much as his little finger for her.

Except to get me out. He did that for me. I thought it was Ser Dontos, my poor old drunken Florian, but it was Petyr all the while. Littlefinger was only a mask he had to wear. Only sometimes Sansa found it hard to tell where the man ended and the mask began. Littlefinger and Lord Petyr looked so very much alike. She would have fled them both, perhaps, but there was nowhere for her to go. Winterfell was burned and desolate, Bran and Rickon dead and cold. Robb had been betrayed and murdered at the Twins, along with their lady mother. Tyrion had been put to death for killing Joffrey, and if she ever returned to King's Landing the queen would have her head as well. The aunt she'd hoped would keep her safe had tried to murder her instead. Her uncle Edmure was a captive of the Freys, while her great-uncle the Blackfish was under siege at Riverrun. I have no place but here, Sansa thought miserably, and no true friend but Petyr.

Baelish is a conglomeration of these two men.  Petyr is positive, Littlefinger is negative.  Loras is positive, the Hound in negative.  (No.  Not good or bad.  I explain below.)  Petyr "got her out."  He rescued her and is protecting her, a parallel to the ideal knight (Loras) that Sansa has, but also wants to use her in a way she does not agree with.  I don't believe Sansa wants Baelish romantically; she refers to Baelish as Littlefinger (the man who was no friend of her) every time he kisses her.  The UnKiss is a parallel to Baelish kissing her.  She cares for Baelish platonically, but finds his kisses intrusive and unwanted, like the Hound's.  In the chapter that Lothor Brune prevents Marillion from raping Sansa, Sansa begins to realize the Hound's true intent that night.  She realizes that "song" is synonymous to sex and/or rape.  She has a nightmare that night of men who have forced advances on her: the last was the Hound.  She mistakes Lothor Brune's voice for the Hound's - who also once saved her from rape - but begins to let go of the Hound as her protector in this scene:

"Lord Petyr said watch out for you." It was Lothor Brune's voice, she realized. Not the Hound's, no, how could it be? Of course it had to be Lothor . . .

That night Sansa scarcely slept at all, but tossed and turned just as she had aboard the Merling King. She dreamt of Joffrey dying, but as he clawed at his throat and the blood ran down across his fingers she saw with horror that it was her brother Robb. And she dreamed of her wedding night too, of Tyrion's eyes devouring her as she undressed. Only then he was bigger than Tyrion had any right to be, and when he climbed into the bed his face was scarred only on one side. "I'll have a song from you," he rasped, and Sansa woke and found the old blind dog beside her once again. "I wish that you were Lady," she said.

When Lady is ordered to be executed, Robert tells Ned to get his daughter a dog.  Symbolically, this is replaced with the Hound in some way.  However, she wishes that Blind Dog "was Lady," having let go of the Hound.

What's interesting to note is that Sansa's polar opposites are Loras and the Hound, not (say) Loras and Joffrey.  If Sansa's polar opposite men were "good and bad" in her mind, she would include Joffrey in some way, who she did kiss.  Sansa cares for both Loras and the Hound, simply in different ways.  Their character as "light and dark" in her mind possibly also play a role.  In the "snow castle" chapter, the world begins with whites, greys, and blacks - extremes.  Sansa cannot figure which polar opposite Baelish truly is, partly because she cannot figure Baelish's true motive out, but perhaps partly because she cannot see the world but in extremes... but she's learning to "see color," variations of truth.  The trees turn green and the sky turns a lighter shade of grey, which is interestingly enough Baelish's colors on his coat of arms.  She sees Baelish's true (?) colors.  Similarly, I believe that Sansa will learn (if she already hasn't) to love Baelish.  Romantically or platonically I'm not sure; perhaps both?  Perhaps she becomes confused about her feelings for him?  (Sansa's referring to Baelish as Littlefinger during every kiss leads me to believe that she never will develop romantic feelings for him.)  Another important point with the Loras and Hound paralleling Baelish and the fact that Sansa does not view either as "bad" is that Sansa will ultimately not view Baelish as "bad."  She will love Baelish for his positive qualities, and pray for him (as she did the Hound) for his negative qualities.  This will be her next "UnMemory," in my opinion; her delusion that Baelish is a good person.  Whether or not Sansa eventually discovers that Baelish is not a good person will have to be seen.  She eventually did recognize that Joffrey was responsible for Lady's death, so perhaps so.

[LadyoftheNorth72]

I think GRRM assumes the reader is capable of taking into account the age, background, experiences, and other factors of his POV characters. It's one of the elements that give this series its strength and success.

I believe that if this entire saga has been told from a strictly third person point of view, it would not have been nearly as successful or fascinating. This way, we get to see and hear events and stories from the perspectives of everyone from young children of both sexes up to the likes of Barristan. Yes it means that grains of salt are often necessary, but it also allows for our imaginations to play a much greater role in the reading.

If the story were told as cold facts from third person, we would not be here discussing any of this, because there would be no need for theories or suspense.

[sweetsunray]

I agree that Loras and Sandor are set as contrasting fantasy men for Sansa. I also would agree that this contrast has not run its course by the end of aDwD yet: that is, a part of her still hopes for a handsome knight, and yet she cannot forget Sandor and regrets not going with him.

That she will come to love Petyr Baelish though is negated by the the snow castle chapter. She rather aggressively pins the head of the doll (a giant's head) on a stick. LF tries to make a joke about it. And she rebuffs him and "leaves him".

The Sandor-Loras contrast surpasses LF imo.

[The Weirwoods Eyes]

Why are people so obsessed with having Sansa "learn to love" men whom she is not sexually attracted to? 

[Isobel Harper]

41 minutes ago, The Weirwoods Eyes said:

Why are people so obsessed with having Sansa "learn to love" men whom she is not sexually attracted to? 

I'm not sure if this was in part directed at me.  If so, what I meant was she will learn to care for LF.  However, as I stated in my previous post, I feel that her feelings will remain platonic.

1 hour ago, sweetsunray said:

I agree that Loras and Sandor are set as contrasting fantasy men for Sansa. I also would agree that this contrast has not run its course by the end of aDwD yet: that is, a part of her still hopes for a handsome knight, and yet she cannot forget Sandor and regrets not going with him.

That she will come to love Petyr Baelish though is negated by the the snow castle chapter. She rather aggressively pins the head of the doll (a giant's head) on a stick. LF tries to make a joke about it. And she rebuffs him and "leaves him".

The Sandor-Loras contrast surpasses LF imo.

If she learns to care for LF, then discovers that he has betrayed her and has been using her, this discover could also illicit such a response.  And for the record, I think Sansa understands Baelish wrong.  "Petyr" is a mask that Baelish must wear in order to trick Sansa into trusting him, while "Littlefinger" is more his true nature, not the other way around.

[The Weirwoods Eyes]

But why must she "learn to" love or care for anyone?? 

[Isobel Harper]

Just now, The Weirwoods Eyes said:

But why must she "learn to" love or care for anyone?? 

Must?  I'm not quite sure what you are arguing.  Could you elaborate?

[The Weirwoods Eyes]

you say she will learn to like or love him, why? why does she have to learn to like or love anyone. by using that phrase you imply her not liking or loving that person is a fault in her, that it is her job to like/love that person. 

Like Septa Mordane, telling her to find something to love in a man, that every man has something you can like, you just have to find it. It all smacks of Bull Shit. 

Sansa's story is shaping up to be all about rejecting the concept that her role in life is to learn to like/love someone whom she does not have any initial attraction or liking towards. She even declares internally that the entire construct of political marriage and learning to like a guy who she doesn't like is bollocks.  

yet time and time again readers will say she will "learn to love" some one whom she is not attracted to. Learn to love being around someone whom she dislikes, by using the word learn you are phrasing Sansa's relationships in term of her being at fault for not and her progressing past that fault to ultimately put aside her own desires and make the best of a situation for the other persons benefit. 

think about the ways in which that term is used in general. 

You'll learn to like it = you will do this thing and you will stop complaining or else

you'll learn to love him = you will give up on your own wants and work at making the best of a forced marriage

you will learn to accept it = you will give up and acquiesce to the situation.

 

 

[Lord Wraith]

Sansa is probably the best example of unreliable narration. IE the Unkiss.

That being said that doesn't mean our POV's are always correct. I believe many of our POV make assumptions that we the reader would believe to be true but is actually incorrect. That is another discussion entirely however.

[Isobel Harper]

9 minutes ago, The Weirwoods Eyes said:

you say she will learn to like or love him, why? why does she have to learn to like or love anyone. by using that phrase you imply her not liking or loving that person is a fault in her, that it is her job to like/love that person. 

<snip>

You have read way to much into that wording.  I believe that Sansa will grow more attached to LF as she spends more time with him.  I suppose I should have used the word "grow" instead of "learn?" 

[The Weirwoods Eyes]

But you are FAR from the first person to use that exact phrasing when talking about Sansa. In fact it is incredibly common. Hence why I said why are people so obsessed with.......

And everything I pointed out about the phrasing of it holds true. literarily speaking, the word Learn when used in this context is loaded with the connotations that I mentioned. So if that is not what you think you meant, maybe you ought to think about why that is the wording you went for? 

[Isobel Harper]

2 minutes ago, The Weirwoods Eyes said:

But you are FAR from the first person to use that exact phrasing when talking about Sansa. In fact it is incredibly common. Hence why I said why are people so obsessed with.......

And everything I pointed out about the phrasing of it holds true. literately speaking, the word Learn when used in this context is loaded with the connotations that I mentioned. So if that is not what you think you meant, maybe you ought to think about why that is the wording you went for? 

I don't know about other users, but I know what I meant.

[The Weirwoods Eyes]

But the wording holds all the connotations I mentioned. So ask yourself why that is the phrasing you went for? 

You don't have to reply, I just think if you consider the phrase you chose, and the ideas it conveys, you may find out something about your attitude towards her as a character.