Jump to content

Why the surprise? (SPOILERS)


Ankou

Recommended Posts

Bran acted surprised that his father didn't defeat Dayne, but wasn't it in the show that he said without Howland Reed there I'd be dead? Or am I only remembering the books? It's without a doubt inconsistent with his characterization in the books, but D&D made it sound like Ned was lying about that fight and disillusioned Bran. This seems out of character for Ned who never bragged about this at all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9 May 2016 at 4:55 AM, Ankou said:
On 9 May 2016 at 4:55 AM, Ankou said:

Bran acted surprised that his father didn't defeat Dayne, but wasn't it in the show that he said without Howland Reed there I'd be dead? Or am I only remembering the books? It's without a doubt inconsistent with his characterization in the books, but D&D made it sound like Ned was lying about that fight and disillusioned Bran. This seems out of character for Ned who never bragged about this at all. 

I just watched Thronecast and was pretty disappointed when Sue labelled Ned a liar over this.

As you said, Ned never bragged about it.  The objective of the conflict was to save Lyanna and he wanted to do that at any cost.  It wasn't a duel in which it would have been unthinkable for a third man to stab Ser Arthur in the back, so I don't know why anyone would be shocked.  Besides, he always credited Howland with saving his life, so he never tried to take the credit for bringing Ser Arthur down.

I guess Bran's surprise or even disillusionment stems from the fact that all his life he'd assumed Ned beat Ser Arthur simply based on the fact that Ned was the one who survived, but that's the problem with assumptions:  you can't blame or hold the other person responsible for what you yourself assume.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 09.05.2016 at 11:55 PM, Ankou said:

Bran acted surprised that his father didn't defeat Dayne, but wasn't it in the show that he said without Howland Reed there I'd be dead? Or am I only remembering the books? It's without a doubt inconsistent with his characterization in the books, but D&D made it sound like Ned was lying about that fight and disillusioned Bran. This seems out of character for Ned who never bragged about this at all. 

 

It was the producer’s idea to play it out like that. They wanted to make Ned look like a liar and a bragger, thus diminishing his image as an honorable man. I guess characters aren’t safe from D&D not even from beyond the grave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the book Ned refers to Dayne as the greatest swordsman he ever knew/faced and thinks he would have died at his hand, if not for Reed. Remembering the ToJ made him sad, not proud. So yeah... I have no clue. Perhaps Bran meant he'd heard the story from others, not just Ned? They may have embellished the tale, because Ned certainly wouldn't. And that goes for show Ned too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in the show Bran never said Ned told him Howland saved him from Dayne:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYUcZTS2pU4&t=1m50s

There he just says Ned told him Howland saved him during the rebellion. He doesn't say how. And maybe Bran just had another more nobler idea of how Reed saved his father. I mean, even book readers expected something more magical than just a stab in the back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with those saying it was Bran's version of the story. Ned told him he would've died if not for Howland. Little kid Bran made a heroic story out of it, remembering that detail, but imagining that his dad fought valiantly nonetheless. He probably imagined a 1v1, somehow Howland Reed was also there, but for the kid Bran who knows the story of the greatest swordsman ever Dayne, the story's all about his father defeating him in single combat. It's all in Bran's head. And who could blame him?

In my opinion, therefore, what the show showed is how it went down "in the books" (if we had more than a dream sequence) as well, at least similarly (personally, I somehow always had the image of Howland tossing a net over Dayne to demobilize him and buy Ned time to get up, dunno why :D). Ned's not proud of it, and that's why he never made a fuzz of the defeat.

This isn't butchering Ned or anything. It had been if they had had Sean Bean walk about KL in S1, telling Jaime "I dealt with Dayne, I can deal with you" or similar. He never did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Unhit said:

This isn't butchering Ned or anything. It had been if they had had Sean Bean walk about KL in S1, telling Jaime "I dealt with Dayne, I can deal with you" or similar. He never did.

Ha, that was good, imagine how funny that would be to see though. He probably was the harpy that killed Barristan and then he'll have managed to take out 3 of 7 of Aery's KG. With ease too.

I agree with the poster who said that it probably wasn't Ned who told Bran to story "half a hundred times." The story was probably romanticized throughout the years and Bran gets the end version.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, The Dames do Moan said:

I agree with the poster who said that it probably wasn't Ned who told Bran to story "half a hundred times." The story was probably romanticized throughout the years and Bran gets the end version.

That's what happens when someone refuses to talk about a story themselves, people concoct versions to tell. Ned had proven to be tight lipped about the past, especially that particular portion of the past.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Cz-99 said:

It's probably just D&D trying to be edgy and continuing their 'walks forward slowly and gets shanked in the back while going for the killing blow' trend.

there has been about 50 of those moments already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The show certainly gives the impression that Bran heard the story a thousand times from his father.  Who else would he have heard it from?  And, why would Ned have allowed him to hear a story a thousand times that painted him as heroically killing the Sword(s) of the Morning instead of being saved by Reed?

Unless Show Ned is indeed a dishonorable lying braggart who chastises Jamie for stabbing the mad king in the back, while he has lied about a back stabbing for 15 years.

This is, um, as the saying goes, the show not the books, and what the show has shown us is Ned Stark liar, braggart, coward.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just took it as a son who idolized his father and thought that he had killed Dayne, the greatest swordsman ever, only to find out that he would have died if his friend hadn't helped.

I don't think they are trying to assassinate Neds character or anything like that, it's just a child learning the truths aren't always what you think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, dbunting said:

I just took it as a son who idolized his father and thought that he had killed Dayne, the greatest swordsman ever, only to find out that he would have died if his friend hadn't helped.

I don't think they are trying to assassinate Neds character or anything like that, it's just a child learning the truths aren't always what you think.

I would buy that, except for 'heard the story a thousand times'....which means that Show Ned allowed his family to hear a thousand times that he  heroically killed the Sword(s) of the Morning when in fact, that was a lie.

I also thought in the scene itself, that Ned giving an unnecessary final stab to him was kind of gross.  If he's just there to get his sister, and isn't a craven, braggart, dishonorable, asshole, why do that?

So I am going to have to believe that the purpose of the way the TOJ was done in the show is to drive home the point, that no one is honorable, and Ned Stark isn't who we thought he was...he's just a lame POS like everyone else in the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, dbunting said:

I just took it as a son who idolized his father and thought that he had killed Dayne, the greatest swordsman ever, only to find out that he would have died if his friend hadn't helped.

I don't think they are trying to assassinate Neds character or anything like that, it's just a child learning the truths aren't always what you think.

Thats exactly i howi see it. Its a son seeing that how his dad defeated Dayne is totally different from how HE imagined it. Every son sees their dad as this great hero.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cas Stark said:

I would buy that, except for 'heard the story a thousand times'....which means that Show Ned allowed his family to hear a thousand times that he  heroically killed the Sword(s) of the Morning when in fact, that was a lie.

I also thought in the scene itself, that Ned giving an unnecessary final stab to him was kind of gross.  If he's just there to get his sister, and isn't a craven, braggart, dishonorable, asshole, why do that?

So I am going to have to believe that the purpose of the way the TOJ was done in the show is to drive home the point, that no one is honorable, and Ned Stark isn't who we thought he was...he's just a lame POS like everyone else in the world.

Really? Ned is a craven, braggart, dishonorable asshole?

Craven - Show Ned never backed down from a fight, a craven would.

Braggart - Show Ned never bragged about killing anyone. You are taking what Bran said and putting those words into Neds mouth.

Dishonorable - yeah, Show and Book Ned have both been dishonorable. Both likely lied about Jons mother.

Asshole - well who isn't and anyone can be called that for some reason or another.

Ned being Ned likely hasn't said anything about what happened other than they were there and he did kill Dayne, prior to that he was just wounded by Reed. Generally the person doing the deed doesn't talk about it, it's the others, the feeder fish who do that. Show Ned has never once spoken about killing anyone in a bragging tone so none of what you said makes any sense other than to get a rise out of people.

Anger much?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, dbunting said:

Really? Ned is a craven, braggart, dishonorable asshole?

Craven - Show Ned never backed down from a fight, a craven would.

Braggart - Show Ned never bragged about killing anyone. You are taking what Bran said and putting those words into Neds mouth.

Dishonorable - yeah, Show and Book Ned have both been dishonorable. Both likely lied about Jons mother.

Asshole - well who isn't and anyone can be called that for some reason or another.

Ned being Ned likely hasn't said anything about what happened other than they were there and he did kill Dayne, prior to that he was just wounded by Reed. Generally the person doing the deed doesn't talk about it, it's the others, the feeder fish who do that. Show Ned has never once spoken about killing anyone in a bragging tone so none of what you said makes any sense other than to get a rise out of people.

Anger much?

The only people left alive were Ned Stark and Howland Reed, check.

Howland Reed does not reside in Wintefell.  Check.

Thus, please explain to me, how Bran could have heard the story a thousand times without this story being told, or the very least, sanctioned by his father?  Which is the same as lying about it.  Either Howland Reed went back to WF and told the heroic Ned story and Ned allowed it, or Ned told it.  How else would it be told?  Which is Ned Stark being a liar and a braggart.

Again, this could have been avoided, the dirtying up of Ned, by having Bran say he wanted to see how his father killed Dayne because his father would NEVER TALK ABOUT IT.  That might have taken 10 more seconds and 2 more sentences of dialogue, but change the entire thrust of the segment.

I thought him stabbing Dayne was dishonorable, yes, and craven.  As I said, it was gross.  There are many things that could have been done there to preserve Ned Stark as a hero...he could have told Dayne he was sorry it came to this, he could have promised to tell his family he died bravely as he had lived, he could have promised to return the Dawn(s) to his House.

Instead, he stabs him when it's obvious he's dying.  Gross.

Also, Dan and Dave in "Inside the Episode" make it clear that Ned is not who we thought he was.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cas Stark said:

The only people left alive were Ned Stark and Howland Reed, check.

When the two of them get back to civilization they tell about what happened and the story grows from there, have you never played the telephone game? Ned in the show did kill Dayne, Check Any details Bran, a little kid heard from others is not Neds fault, nothing we have seen in the show tells us Ned is a braggart, Check

3 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Howland Reed does not reside in Wintefell.  Check.

And? The tale is told once and lives forever, told by others, modified a little each time. Check

4 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

I thought him stabbing Dayne was dishonorable, yes, and craven.  As I said, it was gross.  There are many things that could have been done there to preserve Ned Stark as a hero...

So leaving him to suffer and die slowly would have been honorable and brave? You really need to think that one over. Check mate

And Ned is not supposed to be THE hero, no one is. That is the point of the whole series. No one is completely honorable and good and no one is completely bad. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dbunting said:

When the two of them get back to civilization they tell about what happened and the story grows from there, have you never played the telephone game? Ned in the show did kill Dayne, Check Any details Bran, a little kid heard from others is not Neds fault, nothing we have seen in the show tells us Ned is a braggart, Check

And? The tale is told once and lives forever, told by others, modified a little each time. Check

So leaving him to suffer and die slowly would have been honorable and brave? You really need to think that one over. Check mate

And Ned is not supposed to be THE hero, no one is. That is the point of the whole series. No one is completely honorable and good and no one is completely bad. 

So you think the Lord of Wintefell had no control over what his children were told or believed?  LOL.  Okay then.  I thought the show was about people being able to infer what was shown off screen...this is how all the plot holes are explained away.   So, sorry, the only way Bran has heard the story of his father heroically killing the Sword(s) of the Morning is if his father allowed it, his father managed to keep the Laughing Knight story out of Winterfell as Bran said in prior episode, didn't he?

Even the Hound does a better job of giving the gift of mercy than poor Ned.  He's just a loser all the way around I guess. It didn't look like the gift of mercy to me, it looked like a gross cowardly act so he could say 'he killed Dayne' and it would be kinda sorta true.  Gross.  Totally fucking gross.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

The only people left alive were Ned Stark and Howland Reed, check.

Howland Reed does not reside in Wintefell.  Check.

Thus, please explain to me, how Bran could have heard the story a thousand times without this story being told, or the very least, sanctioned by his father?  

They whispered of Ser Arthur Dayne, the Sword of the Morning, deadliest of the seven knights of Aerys's Kingsguard, and of how their young lord had slain him in single combat.[10]

 Catelyn Stark thinking of Winterfell's maids

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

The only people left alive were Ned Stark and Howland Reed, check.

Howland Reed does not reside in Wintefell.  Check.

Thus, please explain to me, how Bran could have heard the story a thousand times without this story being told, or the very least, sanctioned by his father?  Which is the same as lying about it.  Either Howland Reed went back to WF and told the heroic Ned story and Ned allowed it, or Ned told it.  How else would it be told?  Which is Ned Stark being a liar and a braggart.

Again, this could have been avoided, the dirtying up of Ned, by having Bran say he wanted to see how his father killed Dayne because his father would NEVER TALK ABOUT IT.  That might have taken 10 more seconds and 2 more sentences of dialogue, but change the entire thrust of the segment.

I thought him stabbing Dayne was dishonorable, yes, and craven.  As I said, it was gross.  There are many things that could have been done there to preserve Ned Stark as a hero...he could have told Dayne he was sorry it came to this, he could have promised to tell his family he died bravely as he had lived, he could have promised to return the Dawn(s) to his House.

Instead, he stabs him when it's obvious he's dying.  Gross.

Also, Dan and Dave in "Inside the Episode" make it clear that Ned is not who we thought he was.

 

 

It is a rumour. Do you think that Ned should go to every signle person and tell him/ her how it happened?

Also, have you heard the term "cup de grace"? It is mercy, it is the very opposite of what you think it is. 

You are making an elephant out of a flee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...