Catelyn: Even more misunderstood than before

[Evamitchelle]

Follow-up from the last topic (http://asoiaf.wester...tood-character/)

Yes, I never claimed otherwise. I said he didn't really want to go:

"Take me with you when you go back to the Wall," Jon said in a sudden rush. "Father will give me leave to go if you ask him, I know he will."

Note the "sudden rush", this is a spur of the moment decision. When he reflects on it, he basically thinks that he has no other choice but to leave, because Winterfell is no home to him. (Thanks to who, I wonder?) That Jon didn't really relish the prospect is also shown in the following Bran chapter where Bran notes that Jon's in a very bad mood and not the best company atm. (thus he decides to go off climbing, oh well...)

Catelyn wasn't scheming, but she was a huge factor that compelled Jon to make this decision. And he didn't even know then that his father would be leaving.

"I forget nothing," Jon boasted. The wine was making him bold. He tried to sit very straight, to make himself seem taller. "I want to serve in the Night's Watch, Uncle."

He had thought on it long and hard, lying abed at night while his brothers slept around him. Robb would someday inherit Winterfell, would command great armies as the Warden of the North. Bran and Rickon would be Robb's bannermen and rule holdfasts in his name. His sisters Arya and Sansa would marry the heirs of other great houses and go south as mistress of castles of their own. But what place could a bastard hope to earn?

Jon's reasoning doesn't include "not feeling at home" in Winterfell, only the prospect that his bastard nature will prevent him from becoming a Lord in his own right like his brothers while even his sisters can hope to rule great castles for their husbands. And he's quite right, bastards still have a powerful social stigma placed upon them (a few characters from different regions have said that bastards are inherently bad because the circumstance of their birth itself is "devious"), as shown by noble lords and ladies freaking out when asked to mingle with bastards (Tyrion reflects on how Ellaria Sand will cause an uproar among the noble ladies at the wedding if she's seated amongst them, Lady Sybell Spicer reacts quite badly when a match is made with Joy Hill for her son etc.). Ned's remark that "even a bastard may rise high in the Watch" only works to show that they can't do that well outside of it. Even if Cat had been the best surrogate mother ever, it wouldn't have changed the fact that Jon is a bastard, and thus has significantly smaller social prospects that his trueborn brothers do. Cat didn't make him a bastard (she can't be responsible for everything in these books).

As for Bran remarking Jon being angry all that time when the King left for the hunt, I thought that might have had something to do with the fact that he couldn't go on the hunt with the rest of them and was left behind with girls and babies while Theon, Robb, Tyrion and basically every other noble-born guy in the castle (except Jaime).

He obviously wanted something quite different: An place where he could fight for the good of the realm, where he could apply his abilities, where he would be accepted and honoured, excitement and adventure. Surely that doesn't describe the NW!

The NW seems a better fit than most other places. Bastards aren't given much honour in Westeros (even those who are given big responsibilities like Walder Rivers are still clearly the social inferiors of their brothers and still clearly marked as bastards with a common nickname like Bastard Walder).

Cat herself had her doubts concerning Tyrion's guilt. She wasn't convinced of his innocence because he was such a fitting suspect. Else you have the word of Littlefinger claiming something (that could be checked btw, why didn't they?) against the word of Tyrion claiming something else, but his argument made sense from the logical POV. I'd think siding with caution would be the best choice of action here, not boldly going with the initial plan.

What's the cautious thing to do when she reached the eastern road if not pressing on to the Eyrie ? Not moving and getting killed by the Mountain Men ? Going back into the massacres orchestrated by Tywin ?

And they probably didn't check LF's information because LF was supposed to be a great friend to Cat, because they had already started asking around to no avail (Rodrik questioned Aron Santagar) and because Varys, aka the guy who knows everything about everyone, rose no objection to LF's lie and seemed to accept it. Besides, when LF claims to have lost his dagger to Tyrion there aren't many people who could verify that story besides him.

[birdsong66]

there is no reference to him causing any trouble within the family or his personality or manner being anything but what would be expected of a child of Winterfell.

With respect, using this logic, there is also no evidence to suggest that Jon went out of his way as a child to endear himself to her either. Seems to me, the resentment was clearly mutual. Which, to be clear, does not excuse either Catelyn or Jon's behavior. Neither of them was obligated to endear themselves to the other. Their only obligation, as decided, selfishly, as most plot devices go, by Ned and Ned alone, was to exist beneath the same roof. That they did. If Ned was unhappy as to the quality of that interaction, then Ned was the one to do something about it. He didn't. There's a reason. What do you suppose would have happened if Catelyn had begun to treat Jon as her trueborn child? Maybe in front of the King? And now people, amazed at the selfless generosity, the sainted goodness that is Catelyn Stark are now looking at Jon Snow. Hmm, now when was he born? And why does he look more like a Stark than the others? And so on...

As for Bran remarking Jon being angry all that time when the King left for the hunt, I thought that might have had something to do with the fact that he couldn't go on the hunt with the rest of them and was left behind with girls and babies while Theon, Robb, Tyrion and basically every other noble-born guy in the castle (except Jaime).

Forgotten about this....Again, something Ned could have decided differently, but did not, for a reason.

Point of isuue: Jon is not a "child of Winterfell." The five Stark children are. The four siblings of Ned's generation are. Jon is the bastard issue of the current Lord of Winterfell. Two very different things.

[The Frosted King]

One thing i gotta say about to the "take Jon and love him as if he were her own" crowd...

What do you have? What great inheritance do you hold, that you'll be leaving to your children?

Because if you have nothing, its easy to share love around. All poor = all set.

But when inheritance by birthright is at play, it changes the game.

Look at Roose Bolton. He had a bastard and a trueborn. Bastard hidden away, lived on pigs and corn and mill intake.

Trueborn finds out about bastard, tries to make a friend of him, and bastard promptly murders him (alleged) and usurps his place in short order.

We see the dagger pit that is the Frey brood.

We know of the Blackfyres and their constant rebellion.

It appears that Jon is the exception, and not the rule.

Catelyn wasn't cruel, she was merely distrustful of his presence. And history in the Seven Kingdoms tells us why.

[Lemon Cake]

I'm going to keep my posts Catelyn-positive this time around, since she is a character I like. I won't even touch the Jon Snow subject, as I think it's an issue that gets both overstated by Cat haters and equally understated by her defenders.

Anyway. Something I think Catelyn is often misunderstood for is her comment about Brienne, when she said that there was "no creature more unfortunate than an ugly woman." Many seem to read that line as Catelyn saying, "Omg, I would like, rather be DEAD than be ugly, because ugly people are so ewwwwww."

I don't think that's what she meant at all. On the contrary, I think it was meant in a very compassionate way. In a society like Westeros, being an unattractive woman is often viewed as an unforgivable sin. For most women, making a good marriage is the only way to a decent life, and being physically unattractive is a HUGE hindrance to that. And that's to say nothing of the cruel, merciless mockery an unattractive woman receives, much more so than an unattractive man would receive. The sad, unfair truth is that merely being an ugly woman would make life really shitty for a woman in Westeros, regardless of what other positive qualities she had to offer. Catelyn was fully aware of this, and I believe that this is what she was thinking of when she made that statement.

Since I've also seen it said that this comment showed Catelyn's utter cluelessness -- for example, how could she possibly think being ugly was worse than being a slave, or an abused child, or a starving smallfolk murdered in the war through no fault of their own -- I will also say that I think Catelyn was merely speaking in hyperbole here. If asked, I'm sure she would have said that of course all those things are worse than being ugly.

It's one of many things about her that I feel are really misunderstood. I always thought it was a moment of great compassion from Catelyn.

[The Knight of ...]

And they probably didn't check LF's information because LF was supposed to be a great friend to Cat, because they had already started asking around to no avail (Rodrik questioned Aron Santagar) and because Varys, aka the guy who knows everything about everyone, rose no objection to LF's lie and seemed to accept it. Besides, when LF claims to have lost his dagger to Tyrion there aren't many people who could verify that story besides him.

But Tyrions point that only a fool arms an assassin with his own blade - especially one as remarkable as a valyrian steel/dragonbone hilt one - is a VERY good one, and something that should have immediately occurred to the Starks. The other hole in LF story, that Tyrion never bets against his brother, would not have immediately come to mind, it would have been revealed if the Starks did anything more than a cursory investigation.

[jarl the climber]

One thing i gotta say about to the "take Jon and love him as if he were her own" crowd...

What do you have? What great inheritance do you hold, that you'll be leaving to your children?

Because if you have nothing, its easy to share love around. All poor = all set.

But when inheritance by birthright is at play, it changes the game.

Look at Roose Bolton. He had a bastard and a trueborn. Bastard hidden away, lived on pigs and corn and mill intake.

Trueborn finds out about bastard, tries to make a friend of him, and bastard promptly murders him (alleged) and usurps his place in short order.

We see the dagger pit that is the Frey brood.

We know of the Blackfyres and their constant rebellion.

It appears that Jon is the exception, and not the rule.

Catelyn wasn't cruel, she was merely distrustful of his presence. And history in the Seven Kingdoms tells us why.

Ned had given Cat a bad vibe about Jon and Maester Luwin and Benjen think its a good idea, it was probaly a bad idea, would Winterfell have fallen to Theon if Jon had been there, maybe not, but Mance Ryder might have got across the Wall with his host so maybe it was good idea in a bad way. Its funny Cat alomost got her 2 youngest kids killed out of fear of Jon and Jon would have had to face off against Mance in any event. Hindsight is 20/20 so it was probaly all for the best.

[Datepalm]

I'm going to keep my posts Catelyn-positive this time around, since she is a character I like. I won't even touch the Jon Snow subject, as I think it's an issue that gets both overstated by Cat haters and equally understated by her defenders.

I'll take advantage of this to chime in with my usual argument re Cat hate: I adore her, she's one of my favorite characters, and the Jon Issue is the reason why i'm a Cat-fan.

Not becuase I hate Jon and want to see him suffer (I like Jon quite a bit, actually) but because that relashionship makes her interesting. Along with her other, less than perfectly saintly thoughts, interactions, actions, etc. She's one of the most undeniably morally upstanding characters in the series. Maybe the most so. But as a character I want to read about, its her conflicts, errors and tragedies I enjoy thought.

In short, the idea that Catelyn would be a popular character if only she had been nicer to Jon/Brienne/Arya/given better advice/not freed Jaime/whatever is absolutely absurd to me. The fact is, i've never heard anyone criticize Tyrion or Jaime, as characters, for behaviour less than deserving of the Nobel peace prize.We find Jaime interesting becuase he's sleeping with his sister. Tyrion is popular becuase he's a self pitying basket case. Catelyn however never gets the same slack. If she's ever less than exemplary, then she's somehow loathsome rather than, y'know, human and compelling.

I don't know if it's sexism or some apple-pie idealization tied to motherhood or some nuance to the way the character is written that is different from the way all the others are that passes me by completely or what, but Its this double standard that I find both offensive and inexplicable when it comes to talking about Catelyn.

[David Selig]

Anyway. Something I think Catelyn is often misunderstood for is her comment about Brienne, when she said that there was "no creature more unfortunate than an ugly woman." Many seem to read that line as Catelyn saying, "Omg, I would like, rather be DEAD than be ugly, because ugly people are so ewwwwww."

I don't think that's what she meant at all. On the contrary, I think it was meant in a very compassionate way. In a society like Westeros, being an unattractive woman is often viewed as an unforgivable sin. For most women, making a good marriage is the only way to a decent life, and being physically unattractive is a HUGE hindrance to that. And that's to say nothing of the cruel, merciless mockery an unattractive woman receives, much more so than an unattractive man would receive. The sad, unfair truth is that merely being an ugly woman would make life really shitty for a woman in Westeros, regardless of what other positive qualities she had to offer. Catelyn was fully aware of this, and I believe that this is what she was thinking of when she made that statement.

Since I've also seen it said that this comment showed Catelyn's utter cluelessness -- for example, how could she possibly think being ugly was worse than being a slave, or an abused child, or a starving smallfolk murdered in the war through no fault of their own -- I will also say that I think Catelyn was merely speaking in hyperbole here. If asked, I'm sure she would have said that of course all those things are worse than being ugly.

It's one of many things about her that I feel are really misunderstood. I always thought it was a moment of great compassion from Catelyn.

Definitely. IMO it's really obvious that's the way she meant it, and you have to be really biased against her to see it any other way.

But Tyrions point that only a fool arms an assassin with his own blade - especially one as remarkable as a valyrian steel/dragonbone hilt one - is a VERY good one, and something that should have immediately occurred to the Starks.

Only a fool or someone so arrogant that to think his catpaw would never get caught, and Tyrion has arrogance in spades, and the reputation of the Lannisters gives them even more so. Besides, if LF's story was true, he was the only one who could identify the dagger, and he was thousands of miles away from Winterfell and not on good terms with the Starks and Cat after the duel with Brandon. What are the odds they'd ask him of all people to see the dagger and identify it?

[OnionAhaiReborn]

She's one of the most undeniably morally upstanding characters in the series. Maybe the most so. As a character I want to read about, its her conflicts, errors and tragedies I enjoy thought.

Is she? For me the issue isn't that she is evil (I don't think she is) as much as I honestly don't know what is 'good' about her, except for the fact that she clearly loves her children a great deal. Cersei shows us how much immorality can come from loving her children. This, coupled with issues I have with her judgemental personality, is why I dislike her. What are her good or kind acts?

[birdsong66]

Catelyn however never gets the same slack. If she's ever less than exemplary, then she's somehow loathsome rather than, y'know, human and compelling.

This is interesting. If you really examine Catelyn's POV's, through the Red Wedding, she is often holding herself to an exemplary level of conduct. Her reminisces are often founded on the idea that she has failed to fulfill that expectation, and thus by association, she has failed the ones she loves, whose duty it was for her to protect. Can you imagine the strength of will it would take to keep going on when all around you are lost to you, and you think it's your fault? And is there anyone left to comfort her, to tell her that so many factors must be taken into account for how things have turned out?

TBH, I love this character because she is more inherently human, less fantasy, than any other character. She takes the hits, she gets up, takes some more, but all the time does her best to live up to a standard that no one has placed on her but herself when it would have been so much easier to chuck it. In some sense, I believe it is the standard, the idea of what she is versus who she is that determines her interactions with Jon Snow. IOW, who she is would have loved him, but what she is would not allow it.

And that is the beauty and tragedy of Catelyn Stark...

[headtrip_honey]

Honestly, Cat's chapters were often exhausting to read, because I just kept thinking to myself HOW ARE YOU STILL MOVING WOMAN WHY AREN'T YOU IN A FETAL BALL OF PAIN I NEED TO GO TAKE A NAP NOW

[The Mother of The Others]

Why is she misunderstood again?

she's an upper class mom who sees the family in danger, worries, decides to do something about it, throws her weight around and gets involved in the power struggle hoping to gain leverage over the enemy to keep her loved ones safer, and her efforts bring mixed results. but it all leads to interesting new complexity in the story.

[ElizaMartell]

Honestly, Cat's chapters were often exhausting to read, because I just kept thinking to myself HOW ARE YOU STILL MOVING WOMAN WHY AREN'T YOU IN A FETAL BALL OF PAIN I NEED TO GO TAKE A NAP NOW

Seriousl!, Loosing your husband, your son crippled, your sons killed, your daughters held to ransom, your fathers dying all in the space of 8 months? I would have become an alcholic.

[David Selig]

I'll take advantage of this to chime in with my usual argument re Cat hate: I adore her, she's one of my favorite characters, and the Jon Issue is the reason why i'm a Cat-fan.

Not becuase I hate Jon and want to see him suffer (I like Jon quite a bit, actually) but because that relashionship makes her interesting. Along with her other, less than perfectly saintly thoughts, interactions, actions, etc. She's one of the most undeniably morally upstanding characters in the series. Maybe the most so. But as a character I want to read about, its her conflicts, errors and tragedies I enjoy thought.

I can relate to that to a degree. Not that I like Jon, but certainly Cat's behaviour towards makes her more interesting, realistic and conflicted character, and that's a very good thing. It's also one of the few things that make Jon more interesting and less of a fantasy cliche - Cat is a good person yet doesn't like Jon for understandable reasons, unlike everyone else he comes in contact with lter on, where all good guys really like him even when he's fighting against them and all bad ones hate him.

[Lemon Cake]

If you really examine Catelyn's POV's, through the Red Wedding, she is often holding herself to an exemplary level of conduct.

And even if she hadn't been, can you really blame her?

I've often read complaints that Catelyn's chapters are too depressing, and while I can understand why that wouldn't make her your favorite POV to read, I don't understand holding it against the character herself. When your husband has been beheaded, one of your daughters is being held hostage by the people who beheaded him, the other daughter is missing and presumed dead, you believe that your two youngest sons have been murdered, and your last remaining son is embroiled in a war that will likely result in his death if he doesn't win, you're allowed to be a little fucked up and depressed about it.

[LadyoftheNorth72]

I am not going to restate my opinions on Cat's treatment of Jon, or anything else she did, because that dead horse has been beaten to Essos and back.

I would simply like to point out that not agreeing with Cat's actions, or not liking them, does not mean that our "camp" is somehow intellectually crippled to the extent that we cannot "understand" her. I understand just fine why she behaved the way she did. I also understand Jaime's thought process in throwing Bran, Cersei's blind love for Joff despite all his failings, Walder Frey's wounded pride over Robb's broken vow, why Robb felt compelled to break that vow, why Dany has her ass glued to a bench in Meereen and how, in Theon's mind, it was better to be considered a murderer than incompetent.* Understanding all of these things does not require me to agree with them. I find it really condescending to continually insinuate that, just because we disagree with Cat's choices, we are somehow less able to comprehend those choices.

*Before the screaming outrage even begins, please note that I am not equating any of these actions with any of Cat's, or saying that hers were morally superior, inferior or equal to any of them. They are simply a few of the other choices made by other characters that I understand just fine, but also do not agree with.

[ElizaMartell]

Understanding all of these things does not require me to agree with them. I find it really condescending to continually insinuate that, just because we disagree with Cat's choices, we are somehow less able to comprehend those choices.

What I find condecending is the idea Jon lacked so much agency in his actions because Catelyn somehow managed to maneuver her bullying of him to such a high pyschological level that he had to flee. Its an insulting statement of Jon's development nevermind Catelyn's.

[The King in the South]

What I find condecending is the idea Jon lacked so much agency in his actions because Catelyn somehow managed to maneuver her bullying of him to such a high pyschological level that he had to flee. Its insulting inter,s of Jon's development let alone Catelyn's.

Ahhh wow. Did you read the first post of this thread or...?

Catelyn forced Jon to join the NW through psychological bullying...

edit: Whoa, completely misread which side of the issue you were on -.-, my bad

[MaryaStone]

There's something that is getting a bit tiresome for me. Loads and loads of words about Jon Snow. It seems Catelyn's worth is measured according to the way she treated Jon.

I don't dislike Jon, although I find his character a bit predictable and cliche in a series where there are so many interesting realistic characters.

ASOIF isn't about Jon Snow. It's not Jon Snow-centric as far as I know, and if it was, I doubt it would have so many readers who have surpassed their teenage.

Catelyn Stark is not my favourite character and neither is Jon Snow, but I don't dislike any of them either. She is far from perfect but if she was, she would be boring. Depicting a perfectly inmaculate flawless character is unrealistic and uninteresting. If I read the series it's because there are nuanced interesting characters in it, one of which is Cat.

Do I understand why she didn't like having her husband's bastard in her household? Yes, I do understand it. I don't know of anyone who has raised the son her husband had with his lover and I don't know how it can be expected from her to treat him as her own.

It isn't the child's fault, it's not Jon's fault, but it isn't Cat's fault either. It's Ned's fault because he cheated on her ( I really think he didn't but Cat doesn't know). Raising another woman's son is one thing and raising a son your husband conceived while cheating on you is another matter altogether. It would've been laudable to have done something like that but it would have been unrealistic, unless Catelyn was selfless and free from human miseries like jealousy and insecurity.

Would you expect from Robert, Victarion, or even Ned himself to forgive his wife's infidelity and raise her child by another man as his? If you do, it's fair to expect the same from Cat. If you don't, why don't you understand her reaction?

Did Jon deserve the cold treatment he got from her and the cruel words she said to him? Of course not. But he is mature and strong enough not to mope about it for ever.

By the way, not everybody has to love Jon Snow. Maybe Cat didn't like him. Why should she? Only because he was a child? You shouldn't think adults like all the children they know because this is simply not true. Mistreating them is wrong, liking them isn't compulsory.

[ElizaMartell]

There's something that is getting a bit tiresome for me. Loads and loads of words about Jon Snow. It seems Catelyn's worth is measured according to the way she treated Jon.

Me too. Look Catelyn's treatment of him wasn't brilliant but the way it keeps getting brought up as reasons to hate her is mind boggling. Its like people are convinced she conspired to murder him GoT.