Discussing Sansa XXXI: The plot thickens...

[Mladen]

2 hours ago, AryaNymeriaVisenya said:

Interesting thing glossed over here. Jon says he thought Arya was dead. Brienne told Sansa Arya was alive in Season 6. So why has Sansa not told Jon? Perhaps Jon looking for and finding Arya is something she sees as a threat to her influence. Jon and Arya have one mind, if she supports him then Sansa is left in the cold?

Sansa did tell Jon. When she met him in Season 6, she told him "WF is our home. And Bran's and Arya's and Rickon's, wherever they are" He knew that Arya is alive. Why that line was written is beyond me.

[AryaNymeriaVisenya]

16 minutes ago, Risto said:

Sansa did tell Jon. When she met him in Season 6, she told him "WF is our home. And Bran's and Arya's and Rickon's, wherever they are" He knew that Arya is alive. Why that line was written is beyond me.

That line doesn't say Arya is alive though. It just says that she doesn't know her fate. Its not confirmation she's been seen, its 'If she comes back'. Jon could reasonably think Sansa was getting her hopes up. After all, Jon knows Bran went beyond the wall. He has reason to think he is probably dead.

As for the gap between Arya going to Braavos and Sansa meeting Jon. There is no reason to assume that Arya who had survived all those years between Ned's death and meeting Brienne died in that time. If she's survived years, why can't she survive another few months to a year?

[Mladen]

1 hour ago, AryaNymeriaVisenya said:

That line doesn't say Arya is alive though. It just says that she doesn't know her fate. Its not confirmation she's been seen, its 'If she comes back'. Jon could reasonably think Sansa was getting her hopes up. After all, Jon knows Bran went beyond the wall. He has reason to think he is probably dead.

As for the gap between Arya going to Braavos and Sansa meeting Jon. There is no reason to assume that Arya who had survived all those years between Ned's death and meeting Brienne died in that time. If she's survived years, why can't she survive another few months to a year?

Yeah, but that does make your perspective of Sansa keeping the truth from Jon inaccurate. Sam told Jon about Bran, Sansa told him about Arya. There was no hiding here. Yes, reasonably, Arya and Bran could have died, but that still doesn't make the case that Sansa kep the truth from Jon. Just like we know Jon knows about Theon helping Sansa. At the end, some things happen off screen.

[teej6]

18 hours ago, Risto said:

Jon is a commander and he is missing for God knows how much. It is natural for lords to feel a bit abandoned and to search for stability where they can find it. Robb went South, so for many of them, this is history repeating. It is not unreasonable for them to say "Hey, you are here with us, thanks for that" And, Lord Royce said nothing but plain true.

You are right. My mistake, Royce said nothing but the truth. But what Glover said was almost treasonous. He was stating that perhaps Jon should not have been king, which is not the kind of thought a vassal should have, let alone state in public assembly. I still don't agree that Jon's absence gives Glover the right to question Jon's kingship. How are they feeling abandoned? Jon left Sansa in charge till his return, nothing unusual about that. Ned left Cat in charge when he went to KL indefinitely. Now if it was shown that the Lords were worried and discussing the imminent attack of the WWs and Jon, their commander, is absent to lead the defense/charge, then that makes sense. But none of that was shown or implied in the Sansa/Royce/Glover scene. It's shown that Sansa is dutiful and efficiently fulfilling her responsibilities, which is exactly what Jon intended when he left her in charge. 

[Princess_of_Sunspear]

1 hour ago, AryaNymeriaVisenya said:

That line doesn't say Arya is alive though. It just says that she doesn't know her fate. Its not confirmation she's been seen, its 'If she comes back'. Jon could reasonably think Sansa was getting her hopes up. After all, Jon knows Bran went beyond the wall. He has reason to think he is probably dead.

As for the gap between Arya going to Braavos and Sansa meeting Jon. There is no reason to assume that Arya who had survived all those years between Ned's death and meeting Brienne died in that time. If she's survived years, why can't she survive another few months to a year?

Just because Arya survives for years doesn't mean that she can survive for another few months, at least not from Sansa's perspective. Sansa, unlike the viewer, has no idea about Arya's plot armour or fighting skills. Arya was injured several times when in Braavos, she could've died easily (let's not even go into the unrealistic recovery she underwent. No one shrugs off wounds to the abdomen followed by high speed chases).

[Mladen]

8 minutes ago, teej6 said:

You are right. My mistake, Royce said nothing but the truth. But what Glover said was almost treasonous. He was stating that perhaps Jon should not have been king, which is not the kind of thought a vassal should have, let alone state in public assembly. I still don't agree that Jon's absence gives Glover the right to question Jon's kingship. How are they feeling abandoned? Jon left Sansa in charge till his return, nothing unusual about that. Ned left Cat in charge when he went to KL indefinitely. Now if it was shown that the Lords were worried and discussing the imminent attack of the WWs and Jon, their commander, is absent to lead the defense/charge, then that makes sense. But none of that was shown or implied in the Sansa/Royce/Glover scene. It's shown that Sansa is dutiful and efficiently fulfilling her responsibilities, which is exactly what Jon intended when he left her in charge. 

Yeah, Glover was borderline treasonous. It is not a kind of thought he should have, especially in public, but then again, it is North, so I suppose, different rules. It is not just absence. It is the absence in the time of the greatest need. He spoke to them about this threat, practically making them cooperate with wildlings and convincing them that the Apocalypse is coming. So, after they finally believed him, after they understood the gravity of situation, he went against all of their wishes South and he is not returning. It is a bit difficult to say how much time has passed, but I suppose we are closing to three, four, even six months. That is a period enough to make anyone restless if the leader is absent. Sansa is capable, she is efficient, but she is not their chosen one. Can we imagine Dothraki following Tyrion? I am not saying what he said was OK, but the fact remains they have some point. I doubt Glover is malicious, hence him publicly saying what smart one would keep private. Now, possible shenanigans with LF. That is something much closer to treason. And if anything comes from that, then he should pay the price.

[Kleia]

8 hours ago, Pandean said:

A fall as in she might die? Because I doubt she would die. I mean, I may be wrong...

 

And yeah, if they could work together that would be great. But, sisters man. Can't live with 'em, can't live without 'em.

I doubt she'd fall that far haha.  I just meant in terms of you don't build up someone's skills to that degree without a pay off, and something else needs to happen so that Arya realises her own weaknesses (i.e. that she can be manipulated without her knowledge).

I don't know what the repercussions of that could be, I don't think anyone will die but she needs to wise up and quickly.  It might be as simple as a close shave and she realises she's been underestimating Littlefinger and overestimating her own abilities.

Sansa by way of contrast has spent years with enemies everywhere so she keeps her cards close to her chest in order to survive, even if that meant people thought she was a 'silly little girl'.  Arya shows off because she hasn't learned that sort of caution yet, because her survival hasn't depended on that so much as being quicker and more agile, and using fake names, but she can't beat Littlefinger that way.

[teej6]

13 hours ago, Pandean said:

I don't get why people talk about Sansa betraying Ned. All she knew was that Ned wanted her and Arya to leave. According to what I read, it stated that she thought Ned and Cersei fought and that Sansa thought if she talked to Cersei then she could make it better. She didn't know what Cersei was then. She was privy to what was really going on. She was 11. I really don't see it as a bad thing at all.

Sansa did betray Ned's trust in the books. She went to Cersei not as you say to make things better with Ned and Cersei instead she ran to Cersei so that she could get Cersei to tell Robert to command Ned from sending her back to WF and marry her to Joffrey. She betrayed Ned's secret of sending the girls away by ship before shit hit the fan. Did her revelation to Cersei change the outcome of how events unfolded? We don't know. Ned's stupidity of course far outweighs anything Sansa did. But in this instance, Sansa chose her desire to marry Joff and be his queen over her father's wishes and trust. It shows Sansa was selfish at that point in her life. Sansa was not stupid not to see how cruel Joff could be and that her father felt uneasy and threatened in KL. By ghe time Sansa went to Cersei, Ned had been attacked by Jamie and the Lannisters were fighting her mother's people at Riverrun. So Sansa wasn't fully oblivious to the enmity and distrust between Ned and the Lannisters, she just chose to ignore it to achieve her selfish desires. As the series progressed, we know Sansa's character has developed and grown tremendously. Now she longs for WF and family but this wasn't the case in AGOT. Some dismiss Sansa's actions in AGOT as that of a naive child but I don't see it that way. Yes, it was the actions of a child, but the actions of a self-centered child who knew full well what she was doing was wrong when she went to Cersei to complain about her father.

[Pwyll41]

1 hour ago, Risto said:

Yeah, but that does make your perspective of Sansa keeping the truth from Jon inaccurate. Sam told Jon about Bran, Sansa told him about Arya. There was no hiding here. Yes, reasonably, Arya and Bran could have died, but that still doesn't make the case that Sansa kep the truth from Jon. Just like we know Jon knows about Theon helping Sansa. At the end, some things happen off screen.

When I quit thinking that Sansa wanted to help Jon was the Battle of the Bastards.  Don't you think Sansa could have told Jon about the Vale coming to help?  She must have known, unless LF really does have a transporter.  So she willingly withheld that info and Jon should have died.  If Jon and Davos had that info wouldn't they have held off for say an Hour?  Come on, that was an incredibly selfish thing for Sansa to do and there is really no excuse for her to withhold info.  She let thousands of Jon's men die. And now you want us to believe that Sansa has Jon's back? Can't buy it. 'She likes nice things' is a dig and it hit home. Sansa took her parents bed because it was the nicest in the Castle.  Arya's no angel, but she nailed Sansa with that line.

[teej6]

43 minutes ago, Risto said:

Yeah, Glover was borderline treasonous. It is not a kind of thought he should have, especially in public, but then again, it is North, so I suppose, different rules. It is not just absence. It is the absence in the time of the greatest need. He spoke to them about this threat, practically making them cooperate with wildlings and convincing them that the Apocalypse is coming. So, after they finally believed him, after they understood the gravity of situation, he went against all of their wishes South and he is not returning. It is a bit difficult to say how much time has passed, but I suppose we are closing to three, four, even six months. That is a period enough to make anyone restless if the leader is absent. Sansa is capable, she is efficient, but she is not their chosen one. Can we imagine Dothraki following Tyrion? I am not saying what he said was OK, but the fact remains they have some point. I doubt Glover is malicious, hence him publicly saying what smart one would keep private. Now, possible shenanigans with LF. That is something much closer to treason. And if anything comes from that, then he should pay the price.

I agree if the threat of the WWs and Jon's absence is what concerns them then they have the right to be concerned and perhaps complain. But this is not shown or implied. What is shown is Glover stating he should have chosen Sansa without any context. And Jon made clear why he was heading south, for dragonglass and possibly dragons. He made it known that he thought these weapons were the only way that the North could hope to defeat the WWs. And as you say the alleyway meeting between Royce, Glover and LF is meant to cast doubt on their motives in the minds of the viewers. Of course, nothing will come of it but the showrunners mean to create tension and want the viewers like Arya to question Sansa's loyalty to Jon.

As I've said before, they had nothing in way of a storyline in WF so they concorted this sibling rivalry and Jon surrounded by backstabbers plot. But the problem with this plot is that it is full of holes, the biggest of which is omniscient Bran who should just tell Arya that Sansa has a plan or tell Sansa (if she is tempted to betray Jon) not to. But of course they have him conveniently zoned out in front of a tree. I'm sure all this tension will be for naught and the showrunners will give the viewers the aha moment in the end but in the process they sacrifice logic and good storytelling.

[Mladen]

17 minutes ago, teej6 said:

Sansa did betray Ned's trust in the books. She went to Cersei not as you say to make things better with Ned and Cersei instead she ran to Cersei so that she could get Cersei to tell Robert to command Ned from sending her back to WF and marry her to Joffrey. 

Well, even in books, we are not sure how exactly Sansa's actions contributed to Ned's death. Her imprisonment, yes, but his downfall, we are not sure. Martin is clear that Sansa is not blameless, but also that it wasn't only her actions that brought Ned down. That said, it is not part of the TV show's canon and as such is irrelevant to this particular discussion. Hence why we have two subforums  

12 minutes ago, Pwyll41 said:

When I quit thinking that Sansa wanted to help Jon was the Battle of the Bastards.  Don't you think Sansa could have told Jon about the Vale coming to help?  She must have known, unless LF really does have a transporter.  So she willingly withheld that info and Jon should have died.  If Jon and Davos had that info wouldn't they have held off for say an Hour?  Come on, that was an incredibly selfish thing for Sansa to do and there is really no excuse for her to withhold info.  She let thousands of Jon's men die. And now you want us to believe that Sansa has Jon's back? Can't buy it. 'She likes nice things' is a dig and it hit home. Sansa took her parents bed because it was the nicest in the Castle.  Arya's no angel, but she nailed Sansa with that line.

OK, we discussed this countless times. The entire conundrum with Vale army is to create Gandalfian moment. It speaks nothing about Sansa's loyalty to Jon. The narrative of the show doesn't treat the act as treasonous or problematic. In fact, Jon's perspective is that Sansa saved them all. So, as fallible as writing is, and we know that for sure, we can't argue that Sansa didn't want to help Jon.

Sansa didn't choose to stay in Ned and Cat's room, it was given to her. She asked Jon to take the room, but he insisted on her taking it. As for nice things, again, what nice things. That room looked barren as any room in WF. It was just as stupid as arguing to kill the lords.

[Mladen]

8 minutes ago, teej6 said:

As I've said before, they had nothing in way of a storyline in WF so they concorted this sibling rivalry and Jon surrounded by backstabbers plot. But the problem with this plot is that it is full of holes, the biggest of which is omniscient Bran who should just tell Arya that Sansa has a plan or tell Sansa (if she is tempted to betray Jon) not to. But of course they have him conveniently zoned out in front of a tree. I'm sure all this tension will be for naught and the showrunners will give the viewers the aha moment in the end but in the process they sacrifice logic and good storytelling.

That we agree on. I feel as if this entire season, especially this episode is void of any sort of narrative sense. We all expected sisters to clash, but this was just an idiotic way to do so. When someone months ago talked about sisters arguing about Sansa's reign, I thought that it would be like a serious debate over commonfolk or something like that. And instead, this is what we got. It is so sad. 

[teej6]

7 minutes ago, Risto said:

Well, even in books, we are not sure how exactly Sansa's actions contributed to Ned's death. Her imprisonment, yes, but his downfall, we are not sure. Martin is clear that Sansa is not blameless, but also that it wasn't only her actions that brought Ned down. That said, it is not part of the TV show's canon and as such is irrelevant to this particular discussion. Hence why we have two subforums  

Yes, and I made that clear in my post that we do not know if Sansa telling Ned's plans to Cersei changed the outcome of events in anyway. And I was only responding to a poster who appeared to have his/her facts wrong about events in the book. Didn't mean to bring book canon into this thread. 

[Lord Okra]

1 hour ago, Pwyll41 said:

'She likes nice things' is a dig and it hit home. Sansa took her parents bed because it was the nicest in the Castle.  Arya's no angel, but she nailed Sansa with that line.

This was a line to show that Arya doesn't know what she's talking about.  Sansa didn't take the master bedroom.  Jon gave her the master bedroom over her own objections.

It was a great part of what they were building there in that scene which was Arya showing that she didn't know what was going on or what had happened.....like the fact that Sansa tried to get Jon to take her parents old room but Jon insisted that she have it as "Lady of WInterfell."

"I'm not a Stark" Jon said.

Sansa, "You are to me."

[Pandean]

1 hour ago, Kleia said:

I doubt she'd fall that far haha.  I just meant in terms of you don't build up someone's skills to that degree without a pay off, and something else needs to happen so that Arya realises her own weaknesses (i.e. that she can be manipulated without her knowledge).

I don't know what the repercussions of that could be, I don't think anyone will die but she needs to wise up and quickly.  It might be as simple as a close shave and she realises she's been underestimating Littlefinger and overestimating her own abilities.

Sansa by way of contrast has spent years with enemies everywhere so she keeps her cards close to her chest in order to survive, even if that meant people thought she was a 'silly little girl'.  Arya shows off because she hasn't learned that sort of caution yet, because her survival hasn't depended on that so much as being quicker and more agile, and using fake names, but she can't beat Littlefinger that way.

I think she'll wise up.

sooner or later anyway. 

 

I think the the main thing is each sibling has to realize that neither of them are the same as when they last saw each other.

 

[Pandean]

1 hour ago, Risto said:

Well, even in books, we are not sure how exactly Sansa's actions contributed to Ned's death. Her imprisonment, yes, but his downfall, we are not sure. Martin is clear that Sansa is not blameless, but also that it wasn't only her actions that brought Ned down. That said, it is not part of the TV show's canon and as such is irrelevant to this particular discussion. Hence why we have two subforums  

OK, we discussed this countless times. The entire conundrum with Vale army is to create Gandalfian moment. It speaks nothing about Sansa's loyalty to Jon. The narrative of the show doesn't treat the act as treasonous or problematic. In fact, Jon's perspective is that Sansa saved them all. So, as fallible as writing is, and we know that for sure, we can't argue that Sansa didn't want to help Jon.

Sansa didn't choose to stay in Ned and Cat's room, it was given to her. She asked Jon to take the room, but he insisted on her taking it. As for nice things, again, what nice things. That room looked barren as any room in WF. It was just as stupid as arguing to kill the lords.

 

1 hour ago, teej6 said:

Yes, and I made that clear in my post that we do not know if Sansa telling Ned's plans to Cersei changed the outcome of events in anyway. And I was only responding to a poster who appeared to have his/her facts wrong about events in the book. Didn't mean to bring book canon into this thread. 

My apologies

[Pandean]

3 minutes ago, Lord Okra said:

This was a line to show that Arya doesn't know what she's talking about.  Sansa didn't take the master bedroom.  Jon gave her the master bedroom over her own objections.

It was a great part of what they were building there in that scene which was Arya showing that she didn't know what was going on or what had happened.....like the fact that Sansa tried to get Jon to take her parents old room but Jon insisted that she have it as "Lady of WInterfell."

"I'm not a Stark" Jon said.

Sansa, "You are to me."

The scene also shows that Arya still believes Sansa is the same girl from before, IMO. Which is interesting. And it makes sense since people fall back on what they know. 

 

 

[ThePukwudgie]

I was so pissed off at Arya this episode(most episodes really). Sansa didn't deserve that.

[Lord Okra]

10 minutes ago, Pandean said:

The scene also shows that Arya still believes Sansa is the same girl from before, IMO. Which is interesting. And it makes sense since people fall back on what they know. 

 

 

I agree.  They spent the prior episode showing Sansa coming to understand that Arya had changed and they spent this episode showing that Arya still hasn't come to understand that Sansa has changed.

I think Arya will learn to respect Sansa's "skills" after LF fools Arya into causing trouble and Sansa sniffs it out and shows her sister that while Arya may be a killer her big sister has become quite formidable as a ruler/politician.

LF is toying with Arya right now imo.

 

[Illiterati]

3 minutes ago, Lord Okra said:

I agree.  They spent the prior episode showing Sansa coming to understand that Arya had changed and they spent this episode showing that Arya still hasn't come to understand that Sansa has changed.

I think Arya will learn to respect Sansa's "skills" after LF fools Arya into causing trouble and Sansa sniffs it out and shows her sister that while Arya may be a killer her big sister has become quite formidable as a ruler/politician.

LF is toying with Arya right now imo.

 

This is a plausible alternative to my theory that Arya is playing LF.