Defending Cat, again

[lyvyathan]

Please remind me when Cat is making cruel japes about Jon.

Sure why not?

***

Her eyes found him. They were full of poison. "I need none of your absolution, bastard." ...

He was at the door when she called out to him "Jon," she said. He should have kept going, but she had NEVER called him by his name before. He turned to find her looking at his face, as if she were seeing it for the first time.

"Yes?" he said.

"It should have been you," she told him.

***

Yeah, that was hilarious wasn't it? The 14 year boy is going to the Wall and she calls out his name for the first time in 14 years. Why, I laughed til tears came to my eyes. Mayhaps I didn't laugh though.

[lyvyathan]

Ned could've prevented this fiasco by fostering Jon to one of his bannermen, and should've when his wife asked him too. If R+L=J, and he did it to keep his promise, then he needed to be more logical and send Jon away instead of emotionally keeping his nephew around and making said nephew and his wife antagonistic.

Yeah, I don't think many people would say that Ned was a smart brains behind the family that was sure. I agree it would have been more logical to have farmed him out to a distant northern bannerman, it would also have made the bastard less conspicuous and not cause people to wonder too much about the boy's parentage. Plus it would have prevented added complications should Jon start looking more and more like someone's sister's lover :D ie. not like a Stark.

Assuming our assumptions are correct about Lyanna and Raegar having a child mayhaps called Jon. Then Ned would be pretty fortunate that Jon's appearance took after the Stark side of the family and not the Targaryen side - imagine if he looked like his father Rhaegar. Haha, imagine Robert coming to Winterfell - in GoT - to greet Ned's family and to make him His Hand.

"Ah, wonderful Ned, you have such handsome lovely children."

"My Grace is too kind."

"Shut up Ned. Call me Robert c'mon..."

"You look beautiful Sansa"

"Thank you my Grace."

Then Robert meets Jon.

"And this fine young lad with the silver hair and purpley eyes, so this is your bastard son eh? Why he looks just like ... like ... like...like... ahhhh.... Ahrggggg " Robert stares hard and swallows. "A FAR... #$King TARGARAYAN!!!!!?????????"

"HAND ME MY HAMMER AND STAND ASIDE!!!!!" he bellows.

"Robert please" cries out Ned. "For the love you showed Lyanna!!!"

"I'm YOUR LIEGE KING!!!! GET OUT OF MY FAR...."

All mayhem ensues. Coincidentally, the only two people smiling are Cersei and Catelyn. Their eyes meet and for an uncomfortably milli-second they enjoy the moment together,

[lyvyathan]

I never said her response was logical. It was very much emotional. But that doesn't necessarily make her stupid, or a bimbo (which, by the way, is a pretty loaded term that has virtually no male equivalent, so it's best to avoid using it altogether, especially in a Catelyn thread). Everyone acts based on emotion to varying degrees, yet women seem to bear most of the criticism for acting "emotional", while men are often left off the hook for it. That just seems fundamentally sexist to me.

Well I was having the exchange with another poster who seems to have claimed that Catelyn's actions were logical... understandable.

Hmmm... I don't think I'm being sexist by calling Catelyn a bimbo or referencing Shae as a whore. Mayhaps a bit rude, but not sexist. As for a male equivalent of bimbo, I've got a full stack of terms to describe a man as foolish as Catelyn, but none printable on this wonderful forum.

In case you're wondering I thought that Ned Stark was a stupid idiot too. In fact virtually all of the members of Ned Stark's family come out looking like right royal dumb bleeps. I'll forgive Bran and Rickon though, they're just children.

[moonjump05]

Sure why not?

***

Her eyes found him. They were full of poison. "I need none of your absolution, bastard." ...

He was at the door when she called out to him "Jon," she said. He should have kept going, but she had NEVER called him by his name before. He turned to find her looking at his face, as if she were seeing it for the first time.

"Yes?" he said.

"It should have been you," she told him.

***

Yeah, that was hilarious wasn't it? The 14 year boy is going to the Wall and she calls out his name for the first time in 14 years. Why, I laughed til tears came to my eyes. Mayhaps I didn't laugh though.

It wasn't a jape.

Jape: something designed to arouse amusement or laughter

Therefore that exchange cannot be called a 'cruel jape'. It was cruel do doubt. But Cat wasn't joking around.

[Cotter_Pyke]

What about her behaviour towards Mya Stone??

She instanly dislikes the girl when she mentions her name, if i recall correctly.

[Ghost Rider]

She was justified in ignoring him. He was a bastard. He was not her child, she had no obligation to be a mother figure, or even nice to him.

Someone on these forums directed my attention to some unintended long-term consequences of her behaviour towards Jon when saying that it contributed to Robb's decision to marry Jeyne Westerling. And we really see Robb being acutely aware of the strained relationship between his mother and his half-brother when he asks him how Cat had reacted when Jon had said his good-bye to Bran.

Robb was the first witness to the cruelty/unfairness of having to live as a bastard. He knew the nobility of character of his half-brother and still - the stain of bastardy would never go away. He surely didn't wish that fate on a potential child of his. His thoughts about fathering a bastard might have paralleled Jon's own and give him further reasons to marry Jeyne leading to his own demise.

Of course Cat wouldn't have been able to see that. But it is kind of ironic how fate gets back at her.

[David Selig]

You know, if Robb wanted to be so noble and honourable, he should've kept it in his pants and keep his word to the Freys. It's not Cat's fault he was a horny, irresponsible and selfish idiot and lost 4000 soldiers in the middle of a vicious war so he can have sex with the hot girl and then act "nobly" by marrying her, nevermind that by doing this he broke his word and completely ignored his obligations as a king. Just think about it - giving up 4000 soldiers when you need every one of them because of the really small chance Jeyne might be pregnant after they had sex once - that's incredibly selfish and irresponsible.

[Ghost Rider]

You know, if Robb wanted to be so noble and honourable, he should've kept it in his pants and keep his word to the Freys.

I absolutely agree about Robb being the first to blame for his own actions. I was just trying to discern possible motivations behind his decision to not only sleep with Jeyne, but marry her. I agree that he seems to have a very screwed sense of honour there. Even Ned didn't deem it necessary to marry the girl who he dishonoured himself with (and her in the process), if we believe the official story (and Robb surely does). So I just believe that Ned's bastard story and the way it "tainted his honour" as well as Cat's reaction to it influenced Robb's decision.

[lyvyathan]

Someone on these forums directed my attention to some unintended long-term consequences of her behaviour towards Jon when saying that it contributed to Robb's decision to marry Jeyne Westerling. And we really see Robb being acutely aware of the strained relationship between his mother and his half-brother when he asks him how Cat had reacted when Jon had said his good-bye to Bran. Robb was the first witness to the cruelty/unfairness of having to live as a bastard. He knew the nobility of character of his half-brother and still - the stain of bastardy would never go away. He surely didn't wish that fate on a potential child of his. His thoughts about fathering a bastard might have paralleled Jon's own and give him further reasons to marry Jeyne leading to his own demise. Of course Cat wouldn't have been able to see that. But it is kind of ironic how fate gets back at her.

Hmmm... I didn't think of that before!!! God bless this forum. Yes, it does seem really ironic that Robb's marriage choice parallels those of Ned Stark.

You would have thought that Cat would have seen it ... I can't remember whether she saw the resemblance in the book - but if she had, she would have been even more livid at Robb's choice.

[lyvyathan]

You know, if Robb wanted to be so noble and honourable, he should've kept it in his pants and keep his word to the Freys. It's not Cat's fault he was a horny, irresponsible and selfish idiot and lost 4000 soldiers in the middle of a vicious war so he can have sex with the hot girl and then act "nobly" by marrying her, nevermind that by doing this he broke his word and completely ignored his obligations as a king. Just think about it - giving up 4000 soldiers when you need every one of them because of the really small chance Jeyne might be pregnant after they had sex once - that's incredibly selfish and irresponsible.

Oh, but it was the HONORABLE thing to do you see. That trait runs deep in the Stark household.

I think it was Tyrion or Littlefinger who remarked that the Stark's had more honor than they did common sense.

If Ned's ancestors shared the same ideals, it is practically a miracle they managed to hold Winterfell for that long.

[Geddus]

She could make Ned miserable, but he is her husband and she most likely knew that would be making her own life more miserable.

That's not exactly flattering towards Catelyn...

[A wilding]

What about her behaviour towards Mya Stone??

She instantly dislikes the girl when she mentions her name, if i recall correctly.

I am afraid that you don't recall correctly ...

[Cotter_Pyke]

Ehmm, she is warm and friendly with the girl at first, but when she's told Mya's last name she becomes cold and distant.

[brashcandy]

Can you imagine if your spouse came home with someone else's child, never told you who his other parent was, told you that he had to be raised and cared for in your household, and would brook no argument over the subject? How do you think you'd act around the child if this happened? I'd like to think I'd treat the child well, but if this scenario actually happened to me I might very well treat the child coolly, especially if I were living in an era where the child might one day contest my own children's inheritance rights.

And Cat is not his step-mother. She has no obligation to him at all. She didn't marry her love Ned knowing he would foist his bastard into her house and accept it. She had an arranged marriage to a stranger, went to the cold desolate north with no family or friends, and had to live with a legitimate threat to her own children. She could make Ned miserable, but he is her husband and she most likely knew that would be making her own life more miserable.

Ned could've prevented this fiasco by fostering Jon to one of his bannermen, and should've when his wife asked him too. If R+L=J, and he did it to keep his promise, then he needed to be more logical and send Jon away instead of emotionally keeping his nephew around and making said nephew and his wife antagonistic.

Wow, I've never seen so many baseless reasons for justifying why someone can be needlessly cruel to a child that didn't ask to be born. I guess we can all excuse Jaime now then for pushing Bran off that ledge, because god knows he had no obligation to Bran!

Why is it so hard to admit that Catelyn's treatment of Jon was incredibly wrong no matter the circumstances. If Ned brought the baby home and decided that he had to be brought up there and told Catelyn not to ask any questions, then yes, she should have acted like a GROWN UP and done the decent, respectable thing and treated Jon kindly. She didn't have to see him as a son or anything like that, just treated him kindly.

She's actually set a very nasty example for her children about how to treat other who are not legitimate, and lookey now all her children end up as bastards, or orphans without the security of the Stark name (can you say karma?). It would have been prudent of Catelyn to teach them that it doesn't matter what your last name is really, it's more to do with your the quality of your character, but she's too consumed by hate and resentment (for 14 yrs!) to do this. However, despite her best efforts, at least the children do recognize the value of Jon.

Ned didn't not make Catelyn "antagonistic"; she chose to be this way all on her own. As I said, Catelyn had ample time to see the kind of child Jon was and to get over her anger. I honestly think she was so incensed that Ned would dare to have another woman over her, Lord Tully's prized treasure, that she completely loses any sense of decency and logic over the situation.

And as to the idea that Jon posed a legitimitate threat to her children's inheritance, this is not true. Jon was a bastard - Catelyn knew he could never inherit a thing (as she smugly tells Robb when they were children) She had five children and was thinking of making a sixth, and all her children were healthy and so was her husband. She also knew that based on Jon's character and his relationship with the Starks he wasn't going to try anything underhanded. But she persists in trying to alienate him because of jealousy, hate and paranoia. It's almost as if she wanted to prove that he was wicked and conniving to justify her treatment of him, and the more he showed his honour and dignity the more resentful she became.

I actually think the war was a good humbling experience for Catelyn, in some ways she needed to be brought low, to realise that being "trueborn" doesn't mean much when people are dying daily and fates can change on a whim.

[corbon]

There is absolute minus zero regard to what may happen to Ned and her two precious daughters who are closeted in King's Landing.

.... (from another post )

And can you explain how taking hostage in open public the freak son of Tywin Lannister - (you know the same dude who was responsible for butchering the Royal Household, yeah and that matter of the Prince Royal babe getting his brains smashed out while his mother gets raped by The Mountain...) going to make her family in KL ANY SAFER???

Yes, I already did.

Please read post #5, post #11 and especially post #19, this bit in particular (post 5 and 11 have the actual explanations why).

Or the whole 'she endangered her family in KL' thing.

As I pointed out before most of the responses, her family are endangered the moment Tyrion sees her as she understands it. Arresting him does nothing to increase that, and if anything decreases it.

But as usual, people don't even address the arguments pointed out to them, they just come up with the same old half thought through arguments (statements actually, they usually aren't even arguments or reasons) because they want to hate Cat, as she is 'against' both the usual favourites, Jon and Tyrion.

Thank you for proving the point.

All of these counters were all ready on the table before you posted the same old half-thought-through statement.

Hmm... I missed the part when they pinned a sheriff's badge on Catelyn.

Ned (who most definitely did have that power, in the north at least) gave her full powers, she spoke with his voice, and her first task was to actually mobilize troops and prepare the North for war.

And he backed her up.

Robert accepted it as legal. And so did everybody else - even Tywin, who didn't complain that it was illegal, but felt that it was important for people to be too scared of the Lannisters to even take legal action against them.

And I wasn't talking about trusting Tyrion's words over LF's, I was talking about trusting LF, period. When he told her about the dagger, she had no doubts and on that basis only she proceeded in kidnapping Tywin Lannister's son. I don't think it's unreasonable to criticize her for it.

It is not the only basis.

Before this, and unknown to Littlefinger (at least as far as she, and possibly we, knows), she has two different reasons implicating the Lannisters.

Lysa's letter first, telling her the Lannisters murdered Jon Arryn and are plotting against the king.

Then Bran's 'accident' and assassination attempt. The Lannisters are the the 'outsiders' who have means, motive and opportunity.

Then she gets independent corroboration from Littlefinger. Corroboration that is easily confirmed at trial, and thus would be very dangerous to lie about. And Varys doesn't dispute it either.

There is no reason to distrust Littlefinger at this point, and multiple reasons to believe him.

On that basis, I do think it is unreasonable to criticise her for it.

Agreed. Cat mistreated Jon, plain and simple. She did it spitefully and in the most psychologically damaging way someone can to a child: refuse to acknowledge their existence.

There is no evidence of any spite except that one time under extreme circumstances.

She also did not refuse to acknowledge his existence. She refused to treat him above his station, except as required to see his physical needs. Jon's welfare is not her responsibility.

So how can she be blamed for not seeing to it?

Add to this the fact that Ned was not even her original betrothed, surely one might expect her to realise that he may have formed attachments with some other woman before he knew he was to marry her.

Ahh, you realise that as Jon is presented as being younger than Robb, therefore Jon is a result of a liason after she was married to Ned?

Specifically, they got married, conceived Robb, Ned leaves to go to war within a week and Jon is conceived while Ned is away at war.

As noted, Cat was justified in feeling resentment, but my goodness, why take it out on Jon?

There is no evidence she took it out on Jon. She always supplied him with everything she was required to supply him with. She just never gave more than she was required to.

There are two aspects here.

First, Jon is basically like a ward of the state that is forced into her home over her objections. It would take a very special kind of person to not resent that (especially given the other aspects), and a very special kind of person to not let it show sometimes.

Second, while Jon's existence is something she could forgive and forget (she says or thinks as much), Jon being raised with her children makes him something much worse - not just a daily reminder of the insult, and the shame she is forced to bear, but also very much a threat to her children. Note that if Jon was not raised with her children but was treated 'normally' as a bastard, like say, Gendry, he would not be anywhere near as much a threat to her children. No one is going to make Gendry into Lord Baratheon because he simply isn't equipped to rule or lead.

So basically she is being castigated because she is not a super-special person.

Guess what, shes pretty much your normal average mother, not some super paragon of virtue.

And if Jon has absolutely no right to Winterfell, why is Cat so bloody insecure? She's already given Ned 3 healthy sons, why continue to perpetuate such dislike on someone that cannot threaten you. Nope, no rationale for her actions.

Because having no right hasn't stopped bastards in the past, nor will it in the future.

Nor has it stopped ambitious men from using bastards who have neither right nor interest.

And anything Jon gets, is literally taken from her children.

And just to make it even worse, it is only enabled because of the special treatment he gets being raised in her household. She is being forced to create a significant threat to her children's future.

Well if you can see nothing wrong with this then I'm not gonna bother to explain it.

It would help if you could, because he is certainly not alone. I honestly can't see why the mother bird must lavish love and care on the cuckoo chick. Care for it's physical needs, yes (I guess), but it's emotional needs are not her problem.

But the fact is that her verbal response to Jon is there for all to see - instead of being courteous... courtesy is a Lady's armor - she is openly hostile and unnecessarily verbally vicious to her husband's bastard. Its there - written in black and white

Umm, you are aware that this one time response is coming on top of literally days of sleeplessness as she waits at her little boy's still-potentially-deathbed?

And you can't excuse her lady's armour slipping somewhat under those circumstances?

And you think she's a bitch?

Sure, she didn't set out to kill Jon literally, but she was probably hoping and praying everyday that he would fall off a cliff or drop on a sword.

There is no evidence for this level of feeling. You are literally making it up.

What she wanted, was for him to be gone from Winterfell, not to be raised with the advantages of a Lord's son, the advantages that made him a potential threat to her children's birthright.

This is why, even though we acknowledge that her outburst in Bran's room was from stress, what she said is actually very true, she did wish the accident had happened to Jon instead.

And what mother wouldn't?

What mother wouldn't rather an accident happened to some random other kid rather than her own, or even more, to some specific kid who was a threat to her own, rather than her own?

But there is no evidence that shows she actually wished harm upon Jon generally.

As for challenging his siblings rights in the future how would he do this? She herself was still young and admittedly hoped to get pregnant again. Robb was the expressed heir of Winterfell, and then his kids etc etc. Ned was still a healthy man, and no one could have predicted that her children would soon start dying or going missing. Catelyn had very little reason to be suspicious of anything concerning Jon.

Go read a history book.

Her function in life, as basically a broodmare in her culture (not that I approve), is to protect, preserve and if possible increase the legacy for her progeny.

Jon, with Stark Blood and Lordly training represents a very real option to any disaffected party (including himself, or even Lannisters if circumstances were different) that wishes to see her children's birthright in other hands. Even if he isn't interested.

The Blackfyres have been a threat to the Targaryens for 4-5 generations already.

What about her behaviour towards Mya Stone??

She instanly dislikes the girl when she mentions her name, if i recall correctly.

Yes, she has her culture's instant prejudice against bastards. And a particularly strong case of it due to the way her life has been affected by one.

How does this make her an awful person?

It makes her a real one. Not perfect by any means, but not someone deserving of the amount of spite and vitriol she gets.

[lyvyathan]

Wow, I've never seen so many baseless reasons for justifying why someone can be needlessly cruel to a child that didn't ask to be born. I guess we can all excuse Jaime now then for pushing Bran off that ledge, because god knows he had no obligation to Bran!

Why is it so hard to admit that Catelyn's treatment of Jon was incredibly wrong no matter the circumstances. If Ned brought the baby home and decided that he had to be brought up there and told Catelyn not to ask any questions, then yes, she should have acted like a GROWN UP and done the decent, respectable thing and treated Jon kindly. She didn't have to see him as a son or anything like that, just treated him kindly.

She's actually set a very nasty example for her children about how to treat other who are not legitimate, and lookey now all her children end up as bastards, or orphans without the security of the Stark name (can you say karma?). It would have been prudent of Catelyn to teach them that it doesn't matter what your last name is really, it's more to do with your the quality of your character, but she's too consumed by hate and resentment (for 14 yrs!) to do this. However, despite her best efforts, at least the children do recognize the value of Jon.

Ned didn't not make Catelyn "antagonistic"; she chose to be this way all on her own. As I said, Catelyn had ample time to see the kind of child Jon was and to get over her anger. I honestly think she was so incensed that Ned would dare to have another woman over her, Lord Tully's prized treasure, that she completely loses any sense of decency and logic over the situation.

And as to the idea that Jon posed a legitimitate threat to her children's inheritance, this is not true. Jon was a bastard - Catelyn knew he could never inherit a thing (as she smugly tells Robb when they were children) She had five children and was thinking of making a sixth, and all her children were healthy and so was her husband. She also knew that based on Jon's character and his relationship with the Starks he wasn't going to try anything underhanded. But she persists in trying to alienate him because of jealousy, hate and paranoia. It's almost as if she wanted to prove that he was wicked and conniving to justify her treatment of him, and the more he showed his honour and dignity the more resentful she became.

I actually think the war was a good humbling experience for Catelyn, in some ways she needed to be brought low, to realise that being "trueborn" doesn't mean much when people are dying daily and fates can change on a whim.

Totally agree with you there... I haven't finished reading the "Dance of Dragon" books yet. But I'm not sure whether Catelyn learnt anything from the war - in terms of character development she went from weakness to weakness.

Mayhaps her courteous treatment of Robb's love flame was a positive sign... but by and large she just does a whole bunch of dumb things and gets a whole lot of people killed.

I felt really sorry for that Innkeeper with the horrible smile - the one that baked the sweet cakes for kids. Did Catelyn wonder whether her actions in GoT would jeopardize the safety of the innkeeper and her family? I doubt it.

[eyeheartsansa]

I think it is simpler than most of you are making it out to be.

She said something really nasty to john at a time when she was stressed and emotionally vulnerable. It was NOT COOL of her to say that, but it was understandable under the circumstances.

It doesn't make her some witch; it does make her a believable human being.

[lyvyathan]

Please read post #5, post #11 and especially post #19, this bit in particular (post 5 and 11 have the actual explanations why).

Yes, I did. And I found them unconvincing.

There was also another reason for Ned to back up his wife when he was confronted with the news that she took the freak son of Tywin Lannister, hostage - he couldn't have let it be known throughout the kingdom that his wife was a loose cannon and acting independent of it.

[Ran]

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink, folks. Something to bear in mind when you find yourself going in circles.

[lyvyathan]

Arguably arresting Tyrion should make her family safer - the King has to take notice and the Lannisters can't move against her family without it being obvious what they are doing. If she doesn't arrest him, he goes back to KL now knowing Ned knows of the conspiracies (from her skewed-data-POV remember), and will conspire against him as well, and all the while the King still doesn't have any formal notice of the plots against him.

I took the time to re-read that... Really how does arresting or kidnapping the freak son of Tywin Lannister "make her family safer" ?

She already has the idea that the Lannister murdered Jon Arryn through some devious ploy.

Does it really make good sense to hold hostage/prisoner a relatively minor member of House Lannister - a dwarf no less - without forewarning her husband stuck in King's Landing with a whole swarm of Lannister troops?