Catelyn is an idiot

[lyvyathan]

I think you fail to see that we all agree on that one. Noone here believes she should have treated Jon cruelly.

Where we differ is the question if she treated him badly at all (save this one situation where she said he should have died in place of Bran) and whether or not her lack of compassion towards Jon makes her a bad person. I don't think that one crooked relationship and a handful of emotional decisions make someone a bad person. For me, a bad person needs ill intent. I can't see ill intent in Catelyn Stark. To me, she is human and acts like a human, with all her faults and mistakes. I have made mistakes in my life and I'm not an evil creature either. Therefore, I don't feel like judging Catelyn.

Why does it infuriate you when people don't get upset about the character?

Are we all on the same page? Don't you realize that some Cat lovers are actually defending her behavior towards Jon?

You say "she is human and acts like a human, with all her faults and mistakes. I have made mistakes in my life and I'm not an evil creature either. Therefore, I don't feel like judging Catelyn." ahhh... then what? Jack the Ripper was a human, Pol Pot was a human, the people who were protesting against America's involvement in Indochina were human... haha.

Actually Cat isn't a human - she's just a character in a story book - some people identitfy with her and some readers like her a lot - other's don't.

I don't like her because of the way she treated Jon and some other mistakes she made. Beg to differ, fine.

[Ygrette]

I want to add one thing that Cat did, which to me, speaks volumes. When she stops Jon to tell him it "should have been him", the only reason he turns around was because he "had never heard her call him by his name before." That just makes me wonder what she DID call him. :unsure:

But that's just another thing you're just assuming. That she called him anything mean. I read this rather as an "she never took notice of him or spoke to him directly at all".

[Ygrette]

I do not believe this is Jon's 'worst' memory of his time in Winterfell, I think he is drawing out this one specifically because his mind is on Robb.

Jon was equally hurt by both of them and the scene I'm talking about is not specifically about Robb. It's about Winterfell. And how he's been hurt by the people of Winterfell.

The way he describes his memory it would be very weird that he describes how Catelyn's "cold look" hurt him, but happened to "forget" all the other abuse some people believe he must have received from her.

Of course, as I said before, I do not blame Robb. But I don't think Catelyn abused Jon.

[lyvyathan]

Catelyn did take it up with Ned. She didn't treat Jon like one of her own children, but it's not like she was cruel to him. She never told him that he should leave Winterfell, even if she did suggest the idea to Ned. She snapped at him once, when her eight year old son was dying, but considering the circumstances I can forgive her.

Yeah, so what? The issue is that she directs her grievance against the CHILD!!!!!! And holds it against him for 15 years for crying out loud.

If she directed her rage against her husband - and sulked and pouted for 15 years in her marriage bed - fine, all power to her.

But she chooses to take it out on the child!

How would YOU feel if you had to live in a household from the age of 1 to 15 with the family's female figure of authority who gives you the silent treatment for 15 years because you were born on the wrong side??? Dude, not cool.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

But that's just another thing you're just assuming. That she called him anything mean. I read this rather as an "she never took notice of him or spoke to him directly at all".

I think Phat Walda is making a really interesting point here that I had never considered before. I think it is more than fair to assume that over the course of 14 years at some point she had to call Jon something, even if she never spoke to him but just had to refer to him. And I think we can also assume that when she called him something that wasn't his name it wasn't 'Ser' or 'Lord Snow.' I'm guessing that on those occasions that GRRM refers to where she felt the need to draw the line between Jon the bastard and her trueborn children, she would say something like 'the bastard can't sit at the table tonight' And I think it is mistreatment to refer to a child this way over years and years even if it is not directly to him, and we know Jon heard her say things like this.

edit:

Jon was equally hurt by both of them and the scene I'm talking about is not specifically about Robb. It's about Winterfell. And how he's been hurt by the people of Winterfell.

The way he describes his memory it would be very weird that he describes how Catelyn's "cold look" hurt him, but happened to "forget" all the other abuse some people believe he must have received from her.

Of course, as I said before, I do not blame Robb. But I don't think Catelyn abused Jon.

It is about Winterfell but I don't think Jon ever calls this his 'worst' memory of his time there and I also do think that his mind goes to Robb because Stannis is offering him the station that Jon always assumed Robb would have. He pulls this moment to mind in particular not because it's his worst memory but because it's ironic given the situation he is in now. Jon doesn't give us a complete rememberance of the time is spent in Wintefell, he dwells on a particular memory of him and Robb that makes sense for him to think back to now that he is being offered the thing that Robb told him he could never have.

[Imp Beyond the Wall]

I agree with everything that you are saying here. I want to add a feew commnets.

I see the fact that she prayed for everyone thrown out as an example of compassion and my response is: words are wind.

As for the 'Saving Private Brienne' situation: I'm going to say that this is Catelyn's finest hour, I'll give you that.

When Cat prays, if she doesn't include "all" the soldiers in her prayers it would be essentially saying, "Dear God bless and protect my children, as for the rest F'em." It is an absurd idea. It reminds me of the line form that Chris Rock movie Head of Stae, "God belss America and No Place Else!"

Saving Private Breinne was without a doubt a good thing. But again, I see this as an example of Cat's brains not her heart. She had just witnessed Stannins' use of "black magic" and she rightly deduces that Renly host will collapse. She knows that getting the hell out of there is her only option. Cat has witnessed multiple examples of Brienne's over-the-top loyalty and she has seen the girl in action, whipping the Knight of Flowers in a melee. The snap decision to recruit Brienne was logical not sentimental. IMO.

[The GRRumbler]

I think Phat Walda is making a really interesting point here that I had never considered before. I think it is more than fair to assume that over the course of 14 years at some point she had to call Jon something, even if she never spoke to him but just had to refer to him. And I think we can also assume that when she called him something that wasn't his name it wasn't 'Ser' or 'Lord Snow.' I'm guessing that on those occasions that GRRM refers to where she felt the need to draw the line between Jon the bastard and her trueborn children, she would say something like 'the bastard can't sit at the table tonight' And I think it is mistreatment to refer to a child this way over years and years even if it is not directly to him, and we know Jon heard her say things like this.

quote please?

you know, she could use "you" or "he" or "him", im just saying...

Now seriously none of the "cat defenders" are trying to justify what she did to him, we also think is something morally condemnable, but we don't think that's enough to call her a monster, or a treacherous womb or to say that "it serves her right" when she received news of her two sons death at Winterfell, thse are all things i've seen been thrown against her in these kind of threads.

[Ygrette]

Onion,

you remember this wrong.

Jon is recalling all the different faces of Winterfell and at one point he says "but it's not Ned Stark's face he sees, but Lady Catelyn's". And then he goes through a number of memories about Catelyn, yet he didn't mention a single word about any kind of abuse, except the fact that she looked at him coldly and that she reminded him of his status.

You may all dislike her for that, but after 18 pages of discussion, I still cannot see abuse.

[The GRRumbler]

Onion,

you remember this wrong.

Jon is recalling all the different faces of Winterfell and at one point he says "but it's not Ned Stark's face he sees, but Lady Catelyn's". And then he goes through a number of memories about Catelyn, yet he didn't mention a single word about any kind of abuse, except the fact that she looked at him coldly and that she reminded him of his status.

You may all dislike her for that, but after 18 pages of discussion, I still cannot see abuse.

If not even Martin's own words could dissuade them, why do you think we can? It's a lost cause =P

[Ygrette]

Oh and rest assured everyone, that if she had truly abused him I would most certainly dislike her as well.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

I want to add one thing that Cat did, which to me, speaks volumes. When she stops Jon to tell him it "should have been him", the only reason he turns around was because he "had never heard her call him by his name before." That just makes me wonder what she DID call him. :unsure:

Jon "had never heard her call him by his name before." The obvious implication being that he heard her call her by other names. I'll admit it's an assumption that she called him 'bastard,' but I think it is a very safe assumption. Pronouns are not going to work on all occasions because people have to know who you are talking about in the first place before you use a pronoun.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

If not even Martin's own words could dissuade them, why do you think we can? It's a lost cause =P

You must have missed my post where I respond directly to Martin's words. Please go back and look at it.

Oh and rest assured everyone, that if she had truly abused him I would most certainly dislike her as well.

I just want to take this moment to say that you have been one of the most polite and reasonable people I have ever gotten into a discussion with on these forums (maybe it's because we're hiding out on the still-reading forum that this hasn't turned into the intense flame war it could have been). Even though it looks like we aren't going to agree, I thank you for hearing me out politely and responding to my words and not accusing me of saying things I haven't said or of harboring irrational Cat-hatred.

[The GRRumbler]

Jon "had never heard her call him by his name before." The obvious implication being that he heard her call her by other names. I'll admit it's an assumption that she called him 'bastard,' but I think it is a very safe assumption. Pronouns are not going to work on all occasions because people have to know who you are talking about in the first place before you use a pronoun.

Onion,

you remember this wrong.

Jon is recalling all the different faces of Winterfell and at one point he says "but it's not Ned Stark's face he sees, but Lady Catelyn's". And then he goes through a number of memories about Catelyn, yet he didn't mention a single word about any kind of abuse, except the fact that she looked at him coldly and that she reminded him of his status.

You may all dislike her for that, but after 18 pages of discussion, I still cannot see abuse.

I think that would be explicitly remarked, if that was the case here.

[The GRRumbler]

Quoting from the post were you try to argue against the guy who created this story.

....

Ok there it I've put it in my own post no one can accused me of ignoring it :P . His immediate reply is '"Mistreatment is a loaded word."'- when people resist a term because of it's connotations what they are usually saying is, 'well, it depends on what you mean by that term'- and usually does not mean that the term entirely does not apply. So then GRRM clarifies: No beatings and no verbal abuse and attacking save for the incident by Bran's bedside. All well and good. But then he says some other things, which are important to look at too in light of the fact that he has chosen not to reject the term 'mistreat' but instead to clarify the meaning of it. And so he tells us she would always be certain to draw a sharp line between Ned's trueborn and bastard children. So if the King is coming to Winterfell for a feast and Cat says to Ned and everyone in front of Jon and the other children, 'no way we're putting the bastard on the dais that's an insult to the Royal Family,' that is mistreatment. I can see your replies coming about her being right that he royal family may have been offended and that is not the point, the point is how would you feel as a child if you heard this type of thing your whole life. Because Martin so spake that Cat clearly drew these types of lines frequently and Jon knew it damn well. A direct verbal lashing it may not be; but an emotionally affecting, potentially scarring form of mistreatment it certainly is.

The only kind of mistreatment she threw against Jon is the mistreatment that was necessary to show the limits beteween him and the rest of hes family, wich is in tune with what i said before about her motif to treat jon coldly, the danger that lies in getting bastards close to the family.

Not the Jon is a monster waiting to betray his brothers and take Winterfell for him, but as the Lady of Winterfell, she had to consider this possibility in advance, yes it was something very cold, machiavellian to do, and also very reasonable.

[David Selig]

Agreed. I also think that it is significant that on the occassions where she starts to feel emotions, like pity, she stifles it. Her mantra is "Be strong, Be strong." While I understand what is going on and why she feels sheneeds to do this and I don't think it is deliberate or pathological, I think it means something that she is systematically undermining her own humanity. Her interactions with Robb on campaign, Robb whom we know she loved, sound in some places more like "chess moves" than familial conversation. Over time she becomes more and more about the strategy and the Game of Thrones. Renly at one point cautions Randal Tarly that he is overmatched when "jousting" with Lady Stark. Tarly is no soft-hearted pussycat.

I think that Cat's fundamental tragedy is not that she loses "loved ones", it is that she starts out rather hard hearted but human, and by the end, partly through horrible circumstances but significantly through her own desire to be tough, to be strong, she has loses her humanity.

I really don't see that. I've reread very recently her last few chapters before her death and she's very much human in every way. Yeah, she's not in a good mood for obvious reasons, but she feels all kinds of strong emotions. She tries to keep them in check, but doesn't always succeed. How exactly was she lacking in humanity?

And given that fact, barring any saving graces to make me like her, I just don't like her. And I don't see her do anything truly kind or compassionate. I see the fact that she prayed for everyone thrown out as an example of compassion and my response is: words are wind.

As for the 'Saving Private Brienne' situation: I'm going to say that this is Catelyn's finest hour, I'll give you that. It's probably her best moment in the books since she grabbed the assassin's blade. But Jaime Lannister returning to save Brienne it is not. She sees the shadow killing, she is like, 'what the hell just happened? they are going to suspect us we've got to go now. I'll give you a horse let's get going.' And good job Catelyn, I'll give her that. Sometimes she can get into action mode and be impressive in that sense. She successfully guides Brienne out of there when she is in shock. But she is running too, and if she had stayed she would have been suspected as much and possibly more than Brienne. I still haven't seen Cat go out of her way to help someone who wasn't in her family.

Catelyn risked her life for Brienne by interfering in the battle between armed knights when she had no weapon nor fighting skills - she hit one of those fighting brienne with a brazier. She risked her life again taking Brienne with her.out of the camp. And by helping Brienne she negated all chances of getting a deal with the Tyrells, which was a major political blow for her side. If that's not going out of the way to help someone outside of your family, I don't know what is.

And yeah, words are wind and all, but Martin wrote the sept scene for a reason after all. What was the point of it if not to show us something about Catelyn's character?

[Phat Walda]

If not even Martin's own words could dissuade them, why do you think we can? It's a lost cause =P

I've said this already, but I will reiterate: I feel that if your write a book and the majority of people seem to dislike a certain character, and your only way of setting the record straight is to say, "No, that's not what I meant" in an interview that MANY readers will never see, you have failed. That character is what is written in the book, not what you decide to amend verbally later.

[brashcandy]

Oh shit, this again, she didn't chose to abuse him, she chose to be distant to him, there's a difference. And keeping her distance to him was a choise, that you may not agree but i don't think is something that can be compared to child abuse. And she did took the issue to her husband. This has also been discussed before.

Thus, the question I have is if Catelyn went out of her way to mistreat Jon in the past -- and which form this might have taken -- or if she rather tried to avoid and ignore him?

The autor said himself, mistreatment is a loaded word.

When you choose to let go of your own bias against her and try to judge her with fairness and context, then we can have a honest conversation.

If you're in a home with a child, particularly your husband's child, and you refuse to speak to that child, refuse to even call the child its name, you cast cold looks and make your displeasure known in subtle ways, what in the name of the seven would you call that. If it was another adult that Cat was doing this to, then I might put it down to being rude and distant, but when she's directing it towards a child, then yes, that fits the label of abuse. Because those kinds of actions can damage a child's self-esteem and self worth. There's a reason why you have to be careful concerning children's physical and emotional development. Things that adults can brush off can be extremely harmful when applied to children.

And then to put the cherry on top of all this, Cat declares that as soon as Ned hits the Kingsroad, she wants Jon out of Winterfell. So you never tried to make the kid feel at home, and now you're insisting that he leave the only home he's ever known? If you consider my balking at that an unfair bias towards Cat, then we can end our conversation right here because clearly we're coming at this from two wildly different perspectives on what is fair and not fair.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

Onion,

you remember this wrong.

Jon is recalling all the different faces of Winterfell and at one point he says "but it's not Ned Stark's face he sees, but Lady Catelyn's". And then he goes through a number of memories about Catelyn, yet he didn't mention a single word about any kind of abuse, except the fact that she looked at him coldly and that she reminded him of his status.

You may all dislike her for that, but after 18 pages of discussion, I still cannot see abuse.

Ok to refresh my memory I've gone back and found it.

ASoS pg 1088:

"That morning he called it first. 'I'm Lord of Wintefell!' he cried, as he had a hundred times before. Only this time, this time, Robb had answered, "You can't be Lord of Winterfell, you're bastard-born. My Lady mother says you can't ever be the Lord of Winterfell.'

I actually didn't remember the full extent of this quote so I'm glad you forced me to go back and read it. It seems like Catelyn is actively trying to put a wedge between Jon and Robb here, which I think is another example of mistreatment

and then ASoS pg 1089:

"It was not Lord Eddard's face when he saw floating before him though; it was Lady Catelyn's. With her deep blue eyes and hard cold mouth, she looked a bit like Stannis. Iron, he though, but brittle. She was looking at him the way she used to look at him at Winterfell, whenever she had bested Robb at sowrds or sums or most anything. Who are you? that looked had always seemed to say. This is not your place. Why are you here?"

So I think it's abusive enough that a child feels this way from the way an adult has looked at him. But I don't really see how having remembered her looks specifically shows that she never referred to him as a 'bastard' in his presence on another occasion. He is not remember everything that happened in his whole time at Winterfell. We do know that when King Robert came, Jon knew that he wasn't allowed to sit with them because Lady Catelyn spoke up. Presumably he knows this because she said so in his presence, and presumably there were other occassions when this type of situation arose.

The only kind of mistreatment she threw against Jon is the mostreatment that was necessary to show the limits beteween him and the rest of his family , wich is in tune with what i said before about her motif to treat jon coldly, the danger the lies in getting bastards close to the family.

Not the Jon is a monster waiting to betray his brothers and take Winterfell for him, but as the Lady of Winterfell, she had to consider this possibility in advance, yes it was something very cold to do, and also very reasonable.

I would now ask you to go back and read the post where I say why I think it is wrong to assume that bastards are threats to inheritance.

[Phat Walda]

I think that would be explicitly remarked, if that was the case here.

In that scene, she says, "I don't need your absolution, Bastard," which, based on Jon's [lack of] response, does not seem to be an unusual name for her to choose.

[The GRRumbler]

In that scene, she says, "I don't need your absolution, Bastard," which, based on Jon's [lack of] response, does not seem to be an unusual name for her to choose.

And that qualifies as child abuse, damn, jon should go see a doctor...