Why the surprise? (SPOILERS)

[Ruhail]

On May 8, 2016 at 9:55 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. 

Its the showrunners thinking that they're being clever because, in their eyes honour,chivlary,duty etc. are stupid concepts and everyone is just a selfish hypocrite. 

[Masha]

9 hours ago, Unhit said:

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 ). 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.

Both in the books and in the show, Ned admits that Arthur Dayne was better swordsman. He also says that Howard Reed saved his life. (in the books he adds that Reed helped him defeat Arthur). In fact, both in the books and the show, he doesn't like talking about this particular battle. He refuses to talk about it in the books because its so painful.

So Bran knew four things: 1) Arthur Dayne was great swordsman 2) Howard Reed saved his father's life with zero details on how other than in "rebellion" 3) Ned fought with Arthur during the rebellion and he survived and Arthur did not and 4) Ned was a honorable person who would NEVER lie or fight dishonorably

Is it not realistic to assume that Bran connected the dots assumed that Ned defeated Arthur in honorable battle and since Ned never gave him any details he never had a cause to assume otherwise? And he is extremely surprised and disappointed now?

[Cas Stark]

1 hour ago, dbunting said:

 

But, he heard the story a thousand times.  So, it's nothing about Bran connecting any dots, he's heard the story 1,000 times at Winterfell, since he's never been anywhere else.

And, sorry, picking up the sword and slashing him after he's been stabbed from behind is a punk move.  Young Ned, as presented in the TOJ show version, is a punkass POS.

[TheTowerOfJoy]

Isn't this almost precisely what Theon/Reek did to the guy about to kill Podrick in the premiere that had people cheering?  I guess we care more that it's somehow dishonorable at the TOJ because it was Arthur Dayne instead of "Random Bolton Soldier #3"?  It's not like Ned challenged Dayne to a 1-on-1 duel or something.  No idea why anyone feels this makes Ned in any way shape or form dishonorable.

[Dragon in the North]

20 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

But, he heard the story a thousand times.  So, it's nothing about Bran connecting any dots, he's heard the story 1,000 times at Winterfell, since he's never been anywhere else.

And, sorry, picking up the sword and slashing him after he's been stabbed from behind is a punk move.  Young Ned, as presented in the TOJ show version, is a punkass POS.

I'm sure Bran heard it from the household guard and the other Stark soldiers. Arthur Dayne was a legend and his death was a big deal. Word would have spread like wildfire.

 

As others have said, Arthur Dayne was dying in pain in front of Eddard's eyes. Giving him a quick death does not make him a piece of shit.

[dbunting]

21 minutes ago, TheTowerOfJoy said:

Isn't this almost precisely what Theon/Reek did to the guy about to kill Podrick in the premiere that had people cheering?  I guess we care more that it's somehow dishonorable at the TOJ because it was Arthur Dayne instead of "Random Bolton Soldier #3"?  It's not like Ned challenged Dayne to a 1-on-1 duel or something.  No idea why anyone feels this makes Ned in any way shape or form dishonorable.

Because some people like to stir it up to see us bite.

[Cas Stark]

26 minutes ago, TheTowerOfJoy said:

Isn't this almost precisely what Theon/Reek did to the guy about to kill Podrick in the premiere that had people cheering?  I guess we care more that it's somehow dishonorable at the TOJ because it was Arthur Dayne instead of "Random Bolton Soldier #3"?  It's not like Ned challenged Dayne to a 1-on-1 duel or something.  No idea why anyone feels this makes Ned in any way shape or form dishonorable.

Ehm how about this?

Honor is a kind of wished for state among certain members of society...they want to live and die bravely, Ned embodied that better than anyone.....but, one thing to remember about this fight...he was completely ready to let go of that honor...it certainly does puncture the mythology......

[Ser Hyle]

5 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Ehm how about this?

Honor is a kind of wished for state among certain members of society...they want to live and die bravely, Ned embodied that better than anyone.....but, one thing to remember about this fight...he was completely ready to let go of that honor...it certainly does puncture the mythology......

I recommend writing a strongly worded letter to HBO for sullying your honourable hero.

[Damitol]

3 hours 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.

Exactly.  I think it was also to prepare the audience that "truths aren't always what you think" as there are a ton of show watchers who have no clue what R+L=J means, or what younger Ned will most likely find when he gets to the top of those stairs.  It will be a 'break the internet" moment if (when) Bran and the audience learns that Jon is not Ned's son, and I wouldn't be surprised if that is also the "go to credits" moment of episode 10.

So, I interpreted it the same way as you - Bran learns his father is not 20 feet tall after all (closer to 12 feet), but it's also a calculated moment to foreshadow the much bigger surprise to come from that same day.

[dbunting]

11 minutes ago, Damitol said:

Exactly.  I think it was also to prepare the audience that "truths aren't always what you think" as there are a ton of show watchers who have no clue what R+L=J means, or what younger Ned will most likely find when he gets to the top of those stairs.  It will be a 'break the internet" moment if (when) Bran and the audience learns that Jon is not Ned's son, and I wouldn't be surprised if that is also the "go to credits" moment of episode 10.

So, I interpreted it the same way as you - Bran learns his father is not 20 feet tall after all (closer to 12 feet), but it's also a calculated moment to foreshadow the much bigger surprise to come from that same day.

Right, and Tormund didn't really have sex with a bear or have a penis that is 3' long. Those are just stories that have been embellished over the years. Knowing how Ned is I would bet that the TOJ story is never told to anyone in front of him, only when he isn't around.

[lordstewie]

in another thread i have suggest thet eddard can lie about Toj, hiding the truth for some reason

[Cas Stark]

10 minutes ago, dbunting said:

Right, and Tormund didn't really have sex with a bear or have a penis that is 3' long. Those are just stories that have been embellished over the years. Knowing how Ned is I would bet that the TOJ story is never told to anyone in front of him, only when he isn't around.

That sounds like book Ned, not sure what it has to do with the show, though.

 

[aceluby]

1 minute ago, Cas Stark said:

That sounds like book Ned, not sure what it has to do with the show, though.

 

How many times did show Ned discuss the TOJ fight?

[ErasmusF]

The big problem is that after the episode D&D go on record as saying it kind of "deflates the mythos of Ned Stark as this honorable warrior" or some such nonsense. 

I have stated elsewhere, this was war, not a duel. Getting stabbed in the back is par for the course. Ned didn't do anything dishonorable. D&D seem to be recoloring Ned Stark in a sloppy attempt to hit one of the major themes of the book series: the truth is a matter of perspective. 

Ned's truth was that he was there to end the war and find his sister. Check.

As for whether he lied about what happened at the ToJ, Ned had to explain why five of his bannermen died. Its doubtless that the story grew legs from there. ICYMI, that's a recurrent theme. The narrators are unreliable witnesses. Ned probably said very little about the ToJ, as you would if you were trying to keep a secret. He also has his own truth about the Rebellion, which he hasn't shared with the reader, but I suspect it's that he realized, or maybe even knew at the time, that Rhaegar and Lyanna eloped together. But that didn't make it right, in his eyes, and the pact between the Starks, Baratheons, Arryns and Tullys was important to balancing the Targaryan's power. He's not telling that secret either.   

I get that D&D are trying to hit some of the themes of the books in creative, time efficient ways. But sullying the honor of a beloved character is lazy, and ham-handed if it's just to get a rise out of the audience. They could have done it a little more subtly, and probably very easily in the scene within the ToJ.    

[Cas Stark]

7 minutes ago, aceluby said:

How many times did show Ned discuss the TOJ fight?

1000 times, according to Bran, LOL, since the implication is absolutely that Ned is the one who has told the story, and as I said earlier in the thread, only 2 people could tell any version of the story, Ned and Howland Reed.  It stands to reason, then, that Bran's version of the story came from Ned Stark.  Lies and bragging.

And since show Ned also stabbed Dayne after he was stabbed from behind, it's another example of his lack of honor. Sorry, that wasn't the gift of mercy he was giving, that was a coward getting in a final shot.

[lordstewie]

they can not explain Toj because it' s a great revelation and in the book has not  been written yet

i always thought that Ed lie to hide a secret

[ShadowKitteh]

3 hours ago, Cas Stark said:

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.

No one said that, especially since unless you keep your children locked in the basement, never let them outside, and homeschool them yourself, there's no way to have complete control of what your children are told - and never ever ever under any circumstances is it possible to control what anyone else believes.

Here's how I see it:

Ned beats Catelyn back to Winterfell with baby Jon and a wet-nurse. He tells Ser Roderick what happened. Roderick then probably retells that story on a regular basis over the years - embellishing it to impress the Stark children during their combat training. 

Bran still doesn't know the full story, and why the KG should even be fighting Ned and his men, such less be at the ToJ.

 

[Dragon in the North]

41 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

1000 times, according to Bran, LOL, since the implication is absolutely that Ned is the one who has told the story, and as I said earlier in the thread, only 2 people could tell any version of the story, Ned and Howland Reed.  It stands to reason, then, that Bran's version of the story came from Ned Stark.  Lies and bragging.

And since show Ned also stabbed Dayne after he was stabbed from behind, it's another example of his lack of honor. Sorry, that wasn't the gift of mercy he was giving, that was a coward getting in a final shot.

No, Bran said he only heard the story a thousand times, not who told it to him.

[calilou]

4 hours 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.

Yes, I felt this way about it exactly. I also think that Ned most likely simplified the events at TOJ in general since they end with him needing to hide something. I doubt it's something he wants to be talking about. 

[Cas Stark]

21 minutes ago, Dragon in the North said:

No, Bran said he only heard the story a thousand times, not who told it to him.

 

The showrunners have said blatantly what the scene represents: the puncturing of the mythology of Ned Stark.