Catelyn is an idiot

[brashcandy]

I recently lent GoT to my father after he had seen the show first. One of the first comments he had for me was about Catelyn, he said, "Wow, she is a lot harsher in the book than she is on the show." This idea that we as readers are supposed to take away from the Cat/Jon scene ONLY that Cat was in a really stressful situation is just silly.

A LOT of people have a negative reaction to it. We can all understand the situation she was in, but it was a verrrry harsh moment for her character and this is not a silly misreading of the interaction. And Jon makes it clear that even if Cat didn't lash out like this to him all the time, he was aware of her disdain for him and felt uncomfortable in Winterfell because of it. IIRC correctly he mentions feeling that Cat begrudged him every bite of food. Catelyn is not a character I like very much, but I have no problem with people who like her and say that we can forgive her actions because of the context. If you want to forgive her and feel that she is a good person in spite of the Jon relationship, more power to you, I get your argument. But don't act as if it isn't perfectly clear that she was not nice to Jon ever. In fact, I would say that the people who try to whitewash the relationship do as much disservice to the text as the over-the-top Cat haters who blame the entire war on her.

This. Cheers OnionAhai, Phat Walda, and all the others who have made comments recently on Catelyn's behaviour. It's very hard to state the Catelyn's actions with Jon were grossly unfair, cruel and spiteful without meeting with accusations of being a Jon Snow fanboy/girl, somehow trying to paint Cat as an evil stepmother, or wilfully ignoring GRRM's supposed "clarification". I'm actually on a self-imposed ban from talking about Catelyn, but I just wanted to commend all you for articulating your points perfectly.

[Imp Beyond the Wall]

I have seen the argument over and over that those who have a negative opinion of Lady Stark, because of her outburst toward Jon Snow, need to be more realistic and take into account Westerosi social convention and the fact that this is her husband "BASTARD." But I find it very unrealistic to hold that an act of psychological child abuse is definitively "isolated" just because it tends to impeach the overall character of someone we "like."

[David Selig]

Imp Beyond the Wall - if you are so unwilling to make any allowances for the Westerosi morals and judge the characters only by modern standards, shouldn't you dislike Ned too. After all, he:

1) executed a man who was clearly mentally incapable at the time

2) took a 9 year old child from his parent and kept him a hostage for 10 years, ready to execute him if his father starts trouble

3) remained the best friend of someone who was delighted when a baby and 2 year old were killed in his name

4) (speaking of child abuse by modern standards) took his 7 year old to watch an execution and gave a 3 year old a born in the wild direwolf for a pet

5) was relieved when the Hound killed Mycah that he didn't kill Nymeria instead, and did absolutely nothing to try to punish the Hound for the murder.

6) never told Jon about his mother and let him go to the Wall without even trying to talk him out of it or tell him the truth about the Night's Watch even though he knew that it's quite a terrible place to spend your life

Yet you keep bringing Ned up as an example of a great guy.

[Imp Beyond the Wall]

Imp Beyond the Wall - if you are so unwilling to make any allowances for the Westerosi morals and judge the characters only by modern standards, shouldn't you dislike Ned too. After all, he:

1) executed a man who was clearly mentally incapable at the time

2) took a 9 year old child from his parent and kept him a hostage for 10 years, ready to execute him if his father starts trouble

3) remained the best friend of someone who was delighted when a baby and 2 year old were killed in his name

4) (speaking of child abuse by modern standards) took his 7 year old to watch an execution and gave a 3 year old a born in the wild direwolf for a pet

5) was relieved when the Hound killed Mycah that he didn't kill Nymeria instead, and did absolutely nothing to try to punish the Hound for the murder.

6) never told Jon about his mother and let him go to the Wall without even trying to talk him out of it or tell him the truth about the Night's Watch even though he knew that it's quite a terrible place to spend your life

Yet you keep bringing Ned up as an example of a great guy.

1) I am not sure who you mean, but I think you mean the NW deserter. Ned was very rigid in his views of right and wrong. That is why I know that he did not make his choices lightly. Deserters must die. he did not like it and he did not pass off the responsibility to a headsman. To him it was an unpleasant duty, not at all bloodthirsty or cruel.

2) Ned treated Theon better than Cat treated Jon, IMO. The world of GoT is a very hard, I see that but as hard as ned was I think that he tried be "good" in context. His hostage made a bit of a fool him for his sentimentality.

3) Robert was King, how severe a break would you have liked for Ned to make with him? Indications are that ned did not apporve and that he never forgot it. When he was in a position to take similar actions with regard to Dany and Rhaego he put himself at risk by refusing to go along with Robert. Robert is in many ways "monstrous", I don't know if I would go so far as to call him a monster but he definitely was not trying to live up to anything but the basest of cinclinations. I think ned wanted to do what was best, he did not cop out just because something was what was expected or allowed.

4) Death is a part of life. Lords must dispense justice, like it or not. What part of the beheading was cruel or abusive to Bran? I don't get the thing abou thte direwolf cub? In his infancy I expect shaggydog as gentle as any other pup. I can't be sure though because direwolves don't exist in the real world. I don't see it as abusive in any case.

5) I don't remember Ned's reaction to Micah's death as a one for one trade of relief for not having to kill Nymeria. I don't have the book handy but I seem to remember Ned being angry and disgusted. As for as doing anything, the hound was acting on the King/Queen orders and was beyond Ned's authority to punish.

6) I get the impression that is was a matter of life and death that Ned not tell Jon the truth of his birth. Didn't Ned promise to tell him when they next met? Presumably because going to the wall made Jon a man grown. We never find out why it was worth it to Ned to see Jon in pain over not knowing, but Ned is killed before he has the big heart to heart, however, I am very comfortable believing that it was not because Ned took pleasure in keeping the truth from Jon. Anyhow, also I think that Ned thought Jon "safer" away from his stepmother (wicked of otherwise).

So, to sum up, yeah, I do think that Ned was a great guy. A "too stupid to see the writing on the wall in King's Landing", flawed, barbarian, great guy. I never saw a willfully cruel act from Ned. Ned made me furious sometimes with his rigid sense of honor, but so be it.

I am not sure why you would assasinate Ned's character to justify Cat. ,

[Imp Beyond the Wall]

Imp Beyond the Wall - if you are so unwilling to make any allowances for the Westerosi morals and judge the characters only by modern standards...

I do not accept that I am doing this.

Most lords delegate execution to a headsman, Ned rises above.

Most lords visit whores, Ned rises above.

Most lords would walk away from a bastard, Ned rises above.

I acknowledge the world they live in, I just expect more from Cat if she is to be regarded as "good."

[KhaleesiDany]

Since the first book i felt that Catelyn made a lot of unforgiveable mistakes that led directly to the bad things happening to her family. IMO she does not do a very good job taking care of her children. To be fair she has a lot put up against her, but i always found myself questioning the motivations of her character. I think GoT has a lot of characters making questionable decisions but the first and the worst will always be Catelyn. Why does she burn Lysa's letter? Why not go with Ned and the girl's to King's landing? AND THEN go off by yourself trying to solve Bran's murder attempt...I could never decide if she was just full of herself, or stupid. When she didn't return to Bran and Rickon in CoK, that was when I knew beyond a doubt she was a bad mother. When she got news of their deaths I actually thought "Serves you right." They were babies and she should have went back to them, especially after the whole business with losing her daughters. Instead she stayed with Robb...who had a whole host to protect him! Of course, Robb ends up dying, not on the battlefield (where Cat repeatedly insist she stay on, to no effect) but in the one place Cat had the ability and agency to protect him: in political squabbles off the battlefield. I found it ironic that Robb did everything right and acted the proper king, as Cat had instructed him, before he died. Shows how much she helped him.

And freeing Jaime...that was just stupid, and if Brienne had died that would be Cat's fault, too.

[David Selig]

Imp Beyond the Wall - I am not "assassinating" Ned's character. I like him and I think he was a good guy. My point in the previous post was that he did a lot of things which by modern standards are clearly wrong. But you, me and most readers are willing to overlook those because Westeros is so different from modern day society in many ways and by its standards he had solid reasons for what he did.

It just seems like a double standard on your side that you are willing to overlook Ned's faults and take into account Westerosi standards in his case, but don't do the same for Cat.

[Ran]

She burned the letter because the contents were dangerous and should be commited to memory, not left in a physical object that could be seen or stolen.

She didn't go to KL with Ned because he said so and because it didn't make sense, anyways.

She didn't go off to solve the murder attempt, she went to deliver the dagger and reveal all she knew to Ned, who might well have decided to take it to Robert, where her saying these things would be harder to dismiss than, say, Rodrik Cassel saying it. Because it's true. Rank hath its privileges.

When she didn't return to Bran and Rickon in CoK, that was when I knew beyond a doubt she was a bad mother.

Ah, you're one of the ones I discussed here.

[Imp Beyond the Wall]

It just seems like a double standard on your side that you are willing to overlook Ned's faults and take into account Westerosi standards in his case, but don't do the same for Cat.

I understand what you are saying, and I agree that the world Westeros is very different than the world we live in. When I evaluate Lady Catelyn, and I try to do it fairly and in context, on balance I come away thinking that she was not a very nice woman. That is why I pointed out where I felt like Ned went above and beyond what was expected of him as a Westerosi Lord. Not to trash her, but say you have choices and you are responsible for your choices in any "world". I do not like her but I would not pile on her and condemn everything that she does. She is better than some and worse than some.

[Phat Walda]

Since the first book i felt that Catelyn made a lot of unforgiveable mistakes that led directly to the bad things happening to her family. IMO she does not do a very good job taking care of her children. To be fair she has a lot put up against her, but i always found myself questioning the motivations of her character. I think GoT has a lot of characters making questionable decisions but the first and the worst will always be Catelyn. Why does she burn Lysa's letter? Why not go with Ned and the girl's to King's landing? AND THEN go off by yourself trying to solve Bran's murder attempt...I could never decide if she was just full of herself, or stupid. When she didn't return to Bran and Rickon in CoK, that was when I knew beyond a doubt she was a bad mother. When she got news of their deaths I actually thought "Serves you right." They were babies and she should have went back to them, especially after the whole business with losing her daughters. Instead she stayed with Robb...who had a whole host to protect him! Of course, Robb ends up dying, not on the battlefield (where Cat repeatedly insist she stay on, to no effect) but in the one place Cat had the ability and agency to protect him: in political squabbles off the battlefield. I found it ironic that Robb did everything right and acted the proper king, as Cat had instructed him, before he died. Shows how much she helped him.

And freeing Jaime...that was just stupid, and if Brienne had died that would be Cat's fault, too.

Here is an example of a bunch of things about Cat that I DON'T agree with. I think it's obvious why she burned Lysa's letter, and why she went to King's Landing (though I think it would have been smarter/attracted less attention if she had sent someone instead), and I never ever felt that she should feel responsible for her son's "deaths" (though I did find it strange that she didn't want to go see Bran as soon as he woke up). There were a lot of actions that I didn't agree with, but I understood them.

Personally, though, I found it hard to get through her POV in the books because she was so acidic in the way she thought about everything. People with the last names that indicated they were bastards set her on edge. She didn't have a lot of compassion in her thoughts, she seemed to feel that most people were fools and got irritated over everything. She was incredibly negative, I seem to remember her getting mad more than once for people voicing hope or even acting cheerful. (I will be rereading these things soon so I will quote eventually.) I understand that she was going through terrible things, but that doesn't really make me like her any better. Understand, maybe, but not like.

[Balefont]

But from the moment we meet Cat, her previously "happy world" was turned on its head. And from that point on, she focused on what she thought was best, based on her prior experience and knowledge, to protect her loved ones, her husband's house and her house. Her motives are quite clear and quite honorable even if her decisions were not always correct.

I don't know about you, but I'd be pretty fucking depressed and dour and operating on survival mode once half my family - my children - were "taken from me" by circumstance and put into the lion's den with only the protection of my husband's past relationship with a drunk lush of a king.

[Ygrette]

When she got news of their deaths I actually thought "Serves you right."

*gasp*

Sorry, but that is about the cruelest thing I've ever read in this thread and it almost chokes me to tears that someone can think this way. I assume you're not a mother? I hope so. Wishing a mother that two of her sons died, because she made silly decisions or is getting on your nerves... is... just... wrong. On so many levels.

[Drowsey Dragon]

Since the first book i felt that Catelyn made a lot of unforgiveable mistakes that led directly to the bad things happening to her family. IMO she does not do a very good job taking care of her children. To be fair she has a lot put up against her, but i always found myself questioning the motivations of her character. I think GoT has a lot of characters making questionable decisions but the first and the worst will always be Catelyn. Why does she burn Lysa's letter? Why not go with Ned and the girl's to King's landing? AND THEN go off by yourself trying to solve Bran's murder attempt...I could never decide if she was just full of herself, or stupid. When she didn't return to Bran and Rickon in CoK, that was when I knew beyond a doubt she was a bad mother. When she got news of their deaths I actually thought "Serves you right." They were babies and she should have went back to them, especially after the whole business with losing her daughters. Instead she stayed with Robb...who had a whole host to protect him! Of course, Robb ends up dying, not on the battlefield (where Cat repeatedly insist she stay on, to no effect) but in the one place Cat had the ability and agency to protect him: in political squabbles off the battlefield. I found it ironic that Robb did everything right and acted the proper king, as Cat had instructed him, before he died. Shows how much she helped him.

And freeing Jaime...that was just stupid, and if Brienne had died that would be Cat's fault, too.

"When she didn't return to Bran and Rickon in CoK, that was when I knew beyond a doubt she was a bad mother. When she got news of their deaths I actually thought "Serves you right."

This is insane. Think about what you just said.

[The GRRumbler]

@ Doran II

You're just not being fair to me or my arguments if you are going to tell me I am making points that I have not only not made, but actively rejected. Since it's obvious that I will not be getting a fair hearing-out of what I have to say and instead will be told by you what my opinions are so you can strike them down, I'm going to be done with this conversation.

Try not to cry too much on this but understand one thing that i find amazing in these forums, you can say any opinions you want to but be assured that you will be debated, people that disagree with you will call out your mistakes if you made them, will point out any weaknesses in your argumentation, this is a forum after all, a place for debates, and a very good one at that.

Its comments like the one made by KhaleesiDany that make us "Cat-Defenders" defend her so much, after just a couple of months in these forums i realised she needs this fierce defense, so comments like khaleesi's don't go unoticed, i agree that not all of the people who dislike her are prone to make such stupid comments, but i've seen them too oftenly to ignore.

[Drowsey Dragon]

I have seen the argument over and over that those who have a negative opinion of Lady Stark, because of her outburst toward Jon Snow, need to be more realistic and take into account Westerosi social convention and the fact that this is her husband "BASTARD." But I find it very unrealistic to hold that an act of psychological child abuse is definitively "isolated" just because it tends to impeach the overall character of someone we "like."

How Cat treated Jon in the midst of a complete mental breakdown is now considere an act of psychological child abused? Give me a break. I am not sure how old Jon was in the scene, but he was no child and that was not mental abuse. It was a nasty and hurtful statement made bya suffering, sleep deprived, anguished woman that should simply be taken with a grain of salt. Also you have nothing but speculation to base your assumption on that this was not an "isolated incident". The author has stated that it was.

[Imp Beyond the Wall]

How Cat treated Jon in the midst of a complete mental breakdown is now considere an act of psychological child abused? Give me a break. I am not sure how old Jon was in the scene, but he was no child and that was not mental abuse. It was a nasty and hurtful statement made bya suffering, sleep deprived, anguished woman that should simply be taken with a grain of salt. Also you have nothing but speculation to base your assumption on that this was not an "isolated incident". The author has stated that it was.

I expect that Jon was every bit as grief stricken as Cat was and I take it her as actions abusive. Jon was about 14 or 15, nearly a man grown by Westerosi standards. I you d0on't like 'child" lets say "mother figure" and "child figure" then. The power dynamic was hardly equal so I called it abuse toward a child. You don't like that description, so lets call it abuse toward a weaker person in an inferior postition. Either way it reveals something about who she is. I notice she did not pull this stunt when Ned was within earshot. It reminds me of men who have "anger issues" with there wives and children, but not with their boss or the cop who writes them a ticket. Funny how the anger usually flares with people in a weaker position but not with people in stronger ones.

She may or may not have had similar verbal outbursts toward Jon, but the fact that she did this time, even if under stress is indicative of her character. Realistically, the things we say under pressure do not come out of nowhere. So, the specific comment she made may very well have been a first, I have your word for it that Martin says it was. However I find it highly unrealistic that this is the first time she EVER took a nasty, unnecessary and unprovoked shot at Jon. In the context of the early chapters I think it it more likely that she hurt his feelings regularly, on purpose and over a period of years. That is not setting your hair on fire abuse, but it is abuse. IMO.

Forgive her if you like. I don't see where she deserves it.

[Ygrette]

Actually I don't see Cat as a general failure of character in the sense you describe her. If she truely had the personality to be cruel against minors, why not against Arya, Sansa, Bran, Rickon, Robb, even Hodor or all the other servants? I think her anger against Jon was not justified, but it was directed at Jon only. She clearly projected her anger to a person who is not to blame. This I can see. What I do not see is the personality of a generally cruel and abusive nature.

If I were to create a similar situation in my head, she is not the abusive husband/father with anger issues, but rather she has kindled an (undoubtedly irrational) disliking towards a person, bottled it up for a long time and then, when all hell broke lose, she snapped and all that suppressed anger flew at poor Jon. And I agree, this was (momentary) abusive behaviour, however understandable or justified by their social relationship. In a modern situation, an apology would have been expected. It's much like you've always been annoyed by that colleague and then you hit your head on the door and yell at him for no reason.

If I think about, this may even be an explanation for the unfiltered rage that is sometimes directed at Catelyn. The fact that she treats Jon, a character we like, unfairly, makes her a target and leaves everything else she does somewhat unexcuseable. I think people would hate her less when she had apologized for her outbreak.

[The GRRumbler]

I expect that Jon was every bit as grief stricken as Cat was and I take it her as actions abusive. Jon was about 14 or 15, nearly a man grown by Westerosi standards. I you d0on't like 'child" lets say "mother figure" and "child figure" then. The power dynamic was hardly equal so I called it abuse toward a child. You don't like that description, so lets call it abuse toward a weaker person in an inferior postition. Either way it reveals something about who she is. I notice she did not pull this stunt when Ned was within earshot. It reminds me of men who have "anger issues" with there wives and children, but not with their boss or the cop who writes them a ticket. Funny how the anger usually flares with people in a weaker position but not with people in stronger ones.

She may or may not have had similar verbal outbursts toward Jon, but the fact that she did this time, even if under stress is indicative of her character. Realistically, the things we say under pressure do not come out of nowhere. So, the specific comment she made may very well have been a first, I have your word for it that Martin says it was. However I find it highly unrealistic that this is the first time she EVER took a nasty, unnecessary and unprovoked shot at Jon. In the context of the early chapters I think it it more likely that she hurt his feelings regularly, on purpose and over a period of years. That is not setting your hair on fire abuse, but it is abuse. IMO.

Cut the crap, the autor said she didn't, are you really trying to contradict the guy who created this story here?

The fact that she verbally abused Jon in a moment of extreme grief does not equal the abuse of a child, she was bad to him, she shouldn't say that, we agree, but to compare that to child abuse is just ridiculous.

[Ygrette]

I would be interested to know... how many of you who damn her for this specific emotional outburst are parents in real life? It helps a lot to put things in perspective. I have yet to meet a single person who has never even once yelled at their kids or once said something unfair, however fair of character and however calm a personality.

[Imp Beyond the Wall]

...however understandable or justified by their social relationship...

Understandable is one thing. Justified is another. To justify it is to say, "Ah c'mon he is just a bastard," which I don't believe agree with. I don't believe she acted acceptably. I like characters like Dany and how she tried to intervene for the captive women taken by the Dothraki. It wasn't the "way" in the common world view, but Dany is something "special." I am not trying to make Cat a monster here, but she is no hero. Not in my eyes.

Cut the crap, the autor said she didn't, are you really trying to contradict the guy who created this story here?

The fact that she verbally abused Jon in a moment of extreme grief does not equal the abuse of a child, she was bad to him, she shouldn't say that, we agree, but to compare that to child abuse is just ridiculous.

I hedged my statement about whether the incident in question was isolated or not because, while I have heard it stated several times that Martin said it was an isoloated outburst, I have not seen it sited so I could read it in full context. I am just being realistic. The way I read Cat she never dropped her "attitude" with Jon. She made sure he knew how she felt about him. I find that despicable. Furthermore whether or not making a child's life more difficult on a daily it was abusive is a matter of opinion. Robert and Tywin have no beef with what happened to Rhaegar's children.

I am trying to see her as a real person, not a fairytale caricature, and I think she sat their in Bran's room stewing, knowing that Jon Snow would eventually wnat to see Bran, and thinking "why my true born son and not that BASTARD!" And when he showed up she let him see Bran and she let him have it. And in spite of all that I think that when Jon came into the room if she had been receptive, even with the pong standing grudge, he would have embraced her and commiserated with her. That is the difference between the two people, in my view.

The fact that Cat is good to her own children doesn't move me. If she were just a rank "BASTARD" toward everyone, Jon could take her with a grain of salt. But she isn't. It is just Jon. For his whole life. Because Ned hurt her once. How does that make her come off better?

I here you guys arguments. I understand your points. My opinion of Cat remains the same.