Sansa Stark: Martin's "prince of Denmark"

[Miodrag]

By her fans and haters both, Sansa is often described as being naive at the beginning of ASOIAF. Allow me to, in a rather long post, explain why I disagree with this notion, and why I enjoy Sansa as a character precisely because I think GRRM made her deeper than naive from the very start. Personally, I think she’s “a Hamlet with a period” because of some similarities with the famous prince of Denmark.

(It’s more than possible that some or many aspects of this post were already discussed in countless Sansa threads on these forums; I checked some of them, but not all of them; in case I miss a lot, I just hope that what you’re about to read may be seen as a contribution, rather than repetition.)

By definition, one’s naive if harsh realities of the world escape him/her, most often because of his/her moral innocence and/or idealism. Now, if one does have an understanding of harsh realities, it’s hard to consider him/her naive, even if one keeps defying harsh realities of the world in the name of moral innocence and/or idealism. For example, one may consider movie violence a horrible influence on viewers, and therefore refuse to watch movies at all; it’s not naivety (provided one doesn’t expect to change the world by this alone), but preservation of the innocence and idealism of oneself. “Harsh realities are there, but I want no part in at least some of them.” To simplify: naive is when you see nothing but purity around you; wanting to stay pure is something entirely different.

There is a certain level of naivety in AGOT Sansa, no doubt. She definitely wasn’t aware of the consequences of some of her actions. Had she sensed Lady is going to get killed, I’m sure she’d testify what really happened between Joffrey and Arya. Similar thing with telling Cersei about Ned’s plan: the idea that her father could die because of that certainly didn’t cross her mind. But, in general, Sansa isn’t naive. If splitting hairs, I’d say she deliberately chooses to act naively (but not in a hypocritical way, as Sansa haters might think). For example, she knows killing Lady was wrong, but decides not to blame Cersei for the deed, even though Cersei gave the order right in front of Sansa.

More important example is her last discussion with Ned, when she tells him of Joffrey:

"He is!" Sansa insisted. "I don't want someone brave and gentle, I want him. We'll be ever so happy, just like in the songs, you'll see. I'll give him a son with golden hair, and one day he'll be the king of all the realm, the greatest king that ever was, as brave as the wolf and as proud as the lion."

Yes, she knows Joff isn’t brave and gentle. She knows the harsh reality, it didn’t escape her. But, she’s willing to accept it. Not only that: she wants to use it for the greater good, i.e. for producing a son who’ll be of great benefit to the Starks, the Lannisters and the realm. (That part of quoted paragraph was mind-blowing for me in rereads, but we’ll get back to that later.) That’s not living in denial, which some haters accuse Sansa of. That’s somewhat juvenile, but not senseless at all, example of Sansa’s pragmatism. “I have a chance to marry the future king, who may be a horrible person but I’ll tame him somehow, and our son, whom I’m going to influence much more than my horrible husband will (just like my horrible husband is much more influenced by his mother than by his father, by the way), will be my legacy.” Considering what happened later on, her line of thinking may appear unrealistically idealistic, but, had the events went as planned and Sansa actually married Joff, to me it isn’t a stretch to picture her in charge of their family. But, that’s pure speculation. What isn’t, is the fact that Sansa went behind her father’s back. Regardless of the consequences or lack of, that is something children aren’t supposed to do, especially to a father like Ned. So, it’s not the fact that she confided in Cersei that boggled me, but the fact that she decided to actively sabotage her father’s wish in the first place. Why did she do it? What side of her character commanded her to act so decisively against her father’s explicit order?

Enter Sandor Clegane. A brute and a hired killer, who happens to fall in love with Sansa of all people. And by all people, I mean literally. Sandor’s living in the court for years now, all kinds of women are around him like all the time, and we have no indication any of them ever attracted him anyhow. There had to be naive girls around him. Beautiful girls. Forbidden girls, idealistic girls, highborn, innocent and “innocent” girls, you name it. He had access to all sorts of them. And yet, he falls for no other than Sansa. The reason why may lay in Sandor’s personality, revealed in one aspect he doesn’t share with dogs. Just like he tells Sansa, dogs are the most loyal animals, always ready to die for their master. And Sandor is like a dog in that, no doubt, except for one thing: he doesn’t love his masters one bit. Dogs’ loyalty rests with their endless love for their masters, but Sandor’s loyalty is love-proof. He feels no love for Joff. Nor for the Lannisters. In Sansa’s room, when inviting her to leave KL with him, he regrets he didn’t kill Tyrion years ago – just the implication of this thought in this very moment (with Tyrion being the one who actually saved all the Lannisters and their personnel from Stannis) shows how little Sandor cares about his masters. He’ll serve them all right, probably die for them (just not from the wildfire, which is a phobia of his and he really can’t help it), so long as they don’t ask him to love them. He’s all dog in regards of duty and obedience, but feels absolutely nothing toward his masters. Could it be the trait he recognized, or sensed, he shares with Sansa?

Quite possibly, considering Sansa disobeyed her father and went behind his back. She, too, doesn’t love her “master”, which in that particular moment was Ned. What wildfire was for Sandor (the reason enough to turn his back to his masters), prospect of breaking a betrothal to Joff was for Sansa. That was her wildfire. Now, why wouldn’t she love Ned? Well, there’s a counter question: why would she? She doesn’t hate him. For all we know, up to KL she was a good child, who made no trouble whatsoever and never complicated her parents’ life. She did what was expected of a Stark daughter. But, is she obliged to love them? Frankly, no. She feels for members of her family, but it’s not love, at least not in it’s most usual shape and form. And that’s why she’s so eager to leave them and create a family of her own, even with a monster she knows Joff is (who’s so easy to feel nothing for, opposite to Ned who’s quite hard to be indifferent over). And that’s where I see a certain similarity with Hamlet, who, as interpreted by many, was burdened by guilt over his lack of feelings for his late father (psychoanalysts often find Oedipus complex in Hamlet’s case, in a way that he constantly forces himself to feel disturbed by the crime committed against his father, but nevertheless always finds a reason to hesitate with punishing the actual perpetrator of the crime). Sansa too didn’t care that much about her father, but now that he’s gone, she has a reason to feel guilty over his death (more palpable reason than Hamlet has, for comparison), and she also has the opportunity to revenge him. In fact, scratch that: not revenge, it’s too late for a direct revenge since Joff’s already dead, but Sansa has the opportunity to defend her father’s legacy and everything he stood for.

Now I’d like to go back to the end of the paragraph quoted above. On first read, the Winterfell Sansa made out of snow at the end of ASOS came as a complete shock to me. Only in one of my rereads I realized how often and how subtle is this aspect of her personality hinted at. The quoted paragraph was possibly the first hint at Sansa's deep-rooted sense of loyalty not to any particular member of her family, but to her family as an institution of a sort. Her bond with her heritage isn’t represented through her feelings for her parents and siblings; those feelings did exist in Sansa, but not as strong as in Arya or Robb, for comparison, and certainly not in a traditional sense; her bond is represented through subtly shown, but very deep, sense of loyalty to the Starks name and to the Winterfell, i.e. to the enduring values. Therefore, when Littlefinger said he plans to gather all the swords of The Vale and claim The North in her name, I felt that Sansa may be the best possible person for this claim to rest on. Even though other Starks were and are much more vocal in their love for the family, Sansa may well be the perfect one to carry on the legacy of Starks. And at the same time, she’ll probably have to deal somehow with a personal guilt over her own contribution to the demise of her father, who, in that particular moment, was indeed the patriarch of the Starks.

I’m completely clueless when it comes to where will Sansa’s story go in the future. Even though I see certain similarities with Hamlet, I don’t think her quest, whatever that may be, has to end a failure as his ultimately did. But, I can’t wait to see what GRRM intends to do with her, because what he did so far is as extraordinary as anything.

[King Aegon The Conqueror]

i believe she is making slow progression like most of us on here. she is forging into a powerful player on the game. in the end when all is said and done i ONLY WANT a targaryen on the iron throne being jon dany or aegon but Sansa seriously does pop up in mind sitting on the iron throne with tyrion by her side. she wanted a child with golden hair, who knows maybe with tyrion she might just get one.

[Miodrag]

Regardless of the opinion, thanks for the replies. I posted this literally seconds before yesterday's server malfunction, so I thought all this effort was for nothing. I mean, it may very well be for nothing at the end of the day, if nobody agrees with me at all, but that kind of 'for nothing' is at least less obvious...

[Miodrag]

To the OP, i respect your long post but Sansa was naive up until they chopped off her dad's head.

It's not only credible, but also very popular opinion. However, the character that was meant to represent naivety is Brienne, and I don't think Martin would 'duplicate' characters. Of course, even if they're both naive at the beginning, it doesn't mean duplicating, cause they'd be different in many aspects, but something about Sansa doesn't strike me as naive. It's probably her decision to go behind Ned's back. Naive kids don't do that, in my experience. For comparison, can you imagine Brienne going behind her father's back like that? I can't. Naive girl would be sad, but would never sabotage father's agenda so directly. Cersei and her retinue think her naive and many readers tend to agree with them, but I'd say that's the case of Cersei's lack of talent for judging characters.

And, there are moments of Sansa'a naivety, no doubt. But, they occurred on both sides of Ned's death (dreaming of marriage with Loras, for example). But, I think moments like that don't necessarily make her naive to the point of being defined by that trait.

[greensleeves]

Interesting and lovely post NotYourSir

I especially liked this paragraph:

Now I’d like to go back to the end of the paragraph quoted above. On first read, the Winterfell Sansa made out of snow at the end of ASOS came as a complete shock to me. Only in one of my rereads I realized how often and how subtle is this aspect of her personality hinted at. The quoted paragraph was possibly the first hint at Sansa's deep-rooted sense of loyalty not to any particular member of her family, but to her family as an institution of a sort. Her bond with her heritage isn’t represented through her feelings for her parents and siblings; those feelings did exist in Sansa, but not as strong as in Arya or Robb, for comparison, and certainly not in a traditional sense; her bond is represented through subtly shown, but very deep, sense of loyalty to the Starks name and to the Winterfell, i.e. to the enduring values. Therefore, when Littlefinger said he plans to gather all the swords of The Vale and claim The North in her name, I felt that Sansa may be the best possible person for this claim to rest on. Even though other Starks were and are much more vocal in their love for the family, Sansa may well be the perfect one to carry on the legacy of Starks. And at the same time, she’ll probably have to deal somehow with a personal guilt over her own contribution to the demise of her father, who, in that particular moment, was indeed the patriarch of the Starks.

I've never been entirely comfortable with the labeling of Sansa as 'naive'... it seems too simplistic. Your analysis is extremely thoughtful.

[Miodrag]

Interesting and lovely post NotYourSir

I especially liked this paragraph:

I've never been entirely comfortable with the labeling of Sansa as 'naive'... it seems too simplistic. Your analysis is extremely thoughtful.

Thanks. Me too, I always though it too simplistic for Martin. Like, he wouldn't put that big a burden (betrayal of father) on a character who's naive, especially because of everything he made that character go through afterwards. She's stronger and deeper than that in my book, and all the more fascinating.

[The Mountain That Flies]

The one issue I have with the OP's point (which is very well written and gets props for its literary connections) is the pressures both characters are under. Hamlet is the sole prince of Denmark, and as his father's only child the respinsbility for avenging the murder (which he had no part in) falls sqaurely on his shoulders.

Ned's death was caused by many things, but Sansa very clealy blames herself for it. However, she's not really under any pressure to avenge it, though she does birefly fantasize about it late in GoT. While much of the play of Hamlet is dedicated to the title character trying to be the man he needs to be, Sansa's story post-Ned is about her learning to take care of herself, as no one else in the world wil and the dangers to her only keep growingl. These are both journeys of self-discovery, but the goal and manner they pursue it in are extremly different, based largely on their circumstances.

Again, this is a very interesting analysis, and as I'm a theare director by trade and a massive Shakespeare fan, one that I enjoyed reading immesnly. I just think the siutaions the characters both face are a bit too different to make them an equal comparison.

[Miodrag]

The one issue I have with the OP's point (which is very well written and gets props for its literary connections) is the pressures both characters are under. Hamlet is the sole prince of Denmark, and as his father's only child the respinsbility for avenging the murder (which he had no part in) falls sqaurely on his shoulders.

Ned's death was caused by many things, but Sansa very clealy blames herself for it. However, she's not really under any pressure to avenge it, though she does birefly fantasize about it late in GoT. While much of the play of Hamlet is dedicated to the title character trying to be the man he needs to be, Sansa's story post-Ned is about her learning to take care of herself, as no one else in the world wil and the dangers to her only keep growingl. These are both journeys of self-discovery, but the goal and manner they pursue it in are extremly different, based largely on their circumstances.

Again, this is a very interesting analysis, and as I'm a theare director by trade and a massive Shakespeare fan, one that I enjoyed reading immesnly. I just think the siutaions the characters both face are a bit too different to make them an equal comparison.

I never intended to claim they're an exact match. Sorry if I left such an impression with OP, and blame it on my skills in writing in English. Circumstances they find themselves in are very different, as you say, and their roles in their respective worlds differ too by extension. I do, however, see some important parallels. When Littlefinger revealed his plans to Sansa in AFFC, that's when I recalled Hamlet: both he and Sansa feel the guilt over father's death, and both of them are on the road to avenge him. The way I see it, Hamlet was an inspiration for Sansa. Martin being Martin, he turned the character into a girl, which only made his (Martin's) task of writing the character indefinitely harder, but I can imagine him trying to pull something like that. And possibly succeeding in creating 'a Hamlet' of epic fantasy.

[Miodrag]

She reminds me of Elizabeth I actually, especially when Elizabeth was a child

If this isn't a joke or an irony (I'm not that familiar with English history, so I really wouldn't know), would you care to elaborate on it a little?

ETA: I'm always interested in possible inspirations Martin had in creating ASOIAF.

[David Selig]

Wait a second - Sansa doesn't love her father because she disobeyed him and went behind his back once? All children do this from time to time, most much more often than Sansa. It doesn't prove anything.

[Pikachu101]

If this isn't a joke or an irony (I'm not that familiar with English history, so I really wouldn't know), would you care to elaborate on it a little?

ETA: I'm always interested in possible inspirations Martin had in creating ASOIAF.

The Lady Elizabeth was a lot different to Queen Elizabeth remember that ;)

We're talking about a child who was branded the "traitor's daughter" she was thought to be weak and passive because she told people what they wanted to hear, she wasn't Mary who spoke her mind she was the courteous sister.

Everyone thought her to be the weak link from her siblings and no one expected her to have any real power, she spent her childhood living in a vicious court and was constantly used by power hungry adults.

But if one thing was certain she was a survivor, she used courtesy as her armour and did everything it took to live.

Trust me if Elizabeth was a fictional character everybody would hate her for being passive and feminine.

[bbstark]

Interesting analysis OP. I do agree that Sansa is less naive at the beginning than it appears, and that on some unconcious level, she was aware of the real threat that Joffrey posed to her family. In the beginning (Sansa II after the Lady incident) she does hate him and blames him for the death of Lady, but then deliberately convinces herself that he is not to blame. Here's an excerpt in Sansa II at the feast after the Tourney when she sees Joff for the first time since the Lady incident:

When Prince Joffrey seated himself to her right she felt her throat tighten. He had not spoken a word to her since the awful thing that had happened, and she had not dared to speak to him. At first she thought she hated him for what they'd done to Lady, but after Sansa had wept her eyes dry, she told herself that it had not been Joffrey's doing, not truly. The queen had done it; she was the one to hate, her and Arya. Nothing bad would have happened except for Arya.

So her throat tightens when she sees him. It's an obvious anxiety and stress response. Though she has convinced herself that Joff is not to blame, her body tells her otherwise. She is sitting there waiting for Joff to make it all ok. She isn't naiive about what is going on, she convinces herself instead that she is wrong, and she is passive. That's the main difference between Sansa in GOT and the later books. Though on the surface she may appear to do nothing in the later books, in fact the only time she is truly passive is in GOT.

However I strongly disagree that she did not care for her family. Her defiance to Ned is actually pretty normal. If you have ever been a teenager, you might understand ;) She cares a lot about her family, she does the things she does out of teenage rebellion, not because she doesn't love them! The only person with whom she has a truly problematic relationship is Arya, and that's because of years of small, petty conflict, and the fact that Sansa blames Arya for the death of Lady, which has not been resolved yet between them.

During the Tourney in GOT for instance, when Gregor kills a young boy, Jeyne Poole is crying, but Sansa can't bring herself to cry, and says to herself that she must be cried out from crying over Lady and Bran. She also decides that

it would be different if it were Jory, or Ser Rodrik, or Father , she told herself. The young knight in the blue cloak was nothing to her, some stranger from the Vale of Arryn whose name she'd forgotten as soon as she heard it

So Sansa is loyal and loving, but her love or loyalty don't come easy or cheap. She chooses whom to cry for, and I don't think that's a sign of carelessness towards those that she loves. It's strengthening her bond to the people she would cry for, because those people are special to her.

If you compare the two quotes I provided you can see what happens when Sansa cares for someone (first quote, though chronologically the second in the same chapter) and when she doesn't (in the second one). She has literally just seen a man have his throat sliced by Gregor and bleed to death right in front of her, but her emotions only reveal that though his death is sad, her tears are reserved for those she loves. In contrast she wants Joffrey to love her, and unconciously knowing what that may cost her, her body betrays her, when she completely tightens up from stress.

I do agree that Sansa has a very strong sense of loyalty to the Stark Name, but also that she deliberately made herself survive in order to preserve it. She doesn't think often of her family but it isn't because she doesn't care for them, but because thinking of them is not conducive to her strategy of survival: an absolute disguise of her true feelings.

[Minsc]

Wait a second - Sansa doesn't love her father because she disobeyed him and went behind his back once? All children do this from time to time, most much more often than Sansa. It doesn't prove anything.

Yep, just like how Bran hates his mother and father thus why he continued to climb despite their commands for him not to.

And don't even get anyone started on Arya's lack of love for her parents with all of her disobedience of them.

[Miodrag]

Wait a second - Sansa doesn't love her father because she disobeyed him and went behind his back once? All children do this from time to time, most much more often than Sansa. It doesn't prove anything.

It's hardly a 'regular case' of disobeying one's father. With one's love for parents being as touchy a subject as any, I'm thinking more in 'broad strokes' and 'vague points', so I'd hesitate to strictly define her feelings for her parents. But, we do know she was very, very eager to leave their home. It isn't 'a bad thing' to have such wishes, as Sansa haters keep claiming, but it does speak of a certain level of disconnection from her initial family.

"Minsc" points ironically to Bran, but it's a good comparison. Bran disobeys his parents in a kid way: they told me not to climb, but I'm going to do it anyway. (Arya is a similar case.) But, I can't see his disobedience as an equal to Sansa's. Hypothetically, had Bran didn't see the twincest and went with Ned to KL, would he go behind his father back just because Ned sends him home and therefore 'ruins' his chance of becoming a knight? I don't think so. And, just before he sees twincest, we read how Bran hates to leave Winterfell (even though he looks forward to KL). We never see anything of a sort with Sansa, in the sense of feeling sorry to leave one part of your life for good.

But, we see her creating nothing other but Winterfell out of snow at the end of ASOS. Which means, there is some connection with her heritage, only her connection is way different than Arya's or Bran's or Robb's. She's less connected to the people - even her initial family members - but much more with the legacy of Starks and Winterfell.

[Minsc]

"Minsc" points ironically to Bran, but it's a good comparison. Bran disobeys his parents in a kid way: they told me not to climb, but I'm going to do it anyway. (Arya is a similar case.) But, I can't see his disobedience as an equal to Sansa's. Hypothetically, had Bran didn't see the twincest and went with Ned to KL, would he go behind his father back just because Ned sends him home and therefore 'ruins' his chance of becoming a knight? I don't think so. And, just before he sees twincest, we read how Bran hates to leave Winterfell (even though he looks forward to KL). We never see anything of a sort with Sansa, in the sense of feeling sorry to leave one part of your life for good.

As a girl, Sansa's entire upbringing would be preparing her for the time in which she must leave her family and go live somewhere else with a new family. Thus, Sansa's acceptance of the fact just means she understands her future duty not that she doesn't love her family.

[Pikachu101]

As a girl, Sansa's entire upbringing would be preparing her for the time in which she must leave her family and go live somewhere else with a new family. Thus, Sansa's acceptance of the fact just means she understands her future duty not that she doesn't love her family.

:agree: Ned even told Arya that Sansa has a duty to support Joffrey, it doesn't matter if he's wrong or right Joffrey's still her betrothed

If people are going to use that card then they should say Ned doesn't love his family because even after Joffrey showed his true colours by attacking Arya he didn't try and break off the marriage

[David Selig]

Sansa was eager to leave her home, sure. But there's nothing that indicates it was because she didn't love her parents or had issues with them. She just thought KL is a better place to live for someone like her. Winterfell is a backwater, KL is the capital. Remember, she was supposed to live with Ned in KL, Cat would've probably come in 2 years time too if the whole mess with the war hasn't happened, the wedding to Joff wasn't supposed to happen for at least 3-4 more years.

[Miodrag]

However I strongly disagree that she did not care for her family. Her defiance to Ned is actually pretty normal. If you have ever been a teenager, you might understand ;) She cares a lot about her family, she does the things she does out of teenage rebellion, not because she doesn't love them!

When in teen age, I've been a nightmare to my parents. And to every other authority, basically. But, ultimately, none of my shenanigans ever endangered anyone but me. That's what teenagers do with their rebellious nature, nowadays at least: they endanger themselves all the time, and they cause those who care for them to worry endlessly. Among the Starks, that's Arya, and Bran before the fall (Robb is already 'a man grown' when we meet him, just like Jon, and Rickon is still a kid) - but not Sansa. I see no rebellion in her. In fact, she seems a perfectly obedient daughter, as Septa Mordane would definitely confirm. No rebellion, just a very strong desire to leave the household of Starks, and move into a household of her own in which she's going to contribute to 'the Starks' cause' much more than she contributes at the moment.

But, even if I'm right, is she guilty for not loving them? Does that make her a terrible person? That makes her a loner in my book, just like similar loners I met in real life. If you are/were a teenager, just think of other kids that don't/didn't care that much for their parents. And I'm sure everyone has at least one such a person to point out. Does it make them bad persons? In my experience, not at all. They grew rather normal people, with their own families. They never cease to take care of their parents (where they're still alive). But, they didn't love their parents that much, not nearly as much as I and other kids did and do love ours. Sansa, in my eyes, happens to be one of those kids, only in much, much more dramatic circumstances.

[Minsc]

When in teen age, I've been a nightmare to my parents. And to every other authority, basically. But, ultimately, none of my shenanigans ever endangered anyone but me. That's what teenagers do with their rebellious nature, nowadays at least: they endanger themselves all the time, and they cause those who care for them to worry endlessly. Among the Starks, that's Arya, and Bran before the fall (Robb is already 'a man grown' when we meet him, just like Jon, and Rickon is still a kid) - but not Sansa. I see no rebellion in her. In fact, she seems a perfectly obedient daughter, as Septa Mordane would definitely confirm.

Sansa act only endangered Ned for factors she had no clue about as her father never told her and Arya about the real dangers they were all in. Moreover, the fact that she is normally obedient while Arya and Bran typically rebelled probably explains her actions. In how, she probably felt resentment that her loving father would never punish but only reward disobedient Arya while his actions come off as unfairly punishing her, the good, obedient daughter, thus she felt the right/need to disobey him even through she might love him.

[Miodrag]

As a girl, Sansa's entire upbringing would be preparing her for the time in which she must leave her family and go live somewhere else with a new family. Thus, Sansa's acceptance of the fact just means she understands her future duty not that she doesn't love her family.

The two aren't necessarily connected. Yes, she understands her future duty. I'd say that she understands her duty exceptionally well, as I pointed in OP (by the way, OP means Original post, right?) But, that has nothing to do with her going behind her father's back. Precisely because I think she understands duties remarkably, she knows she should've listen to her father. That's her duty at the moment: not to disobey Ned. And yet, she disobeyed him very directly.

And, how come Sandor Clegane, a person with the most dysfunctional family ever - basically, he hates his own brother for a living - falls in love with Sansa of all people? Yeah, people claim he's infatuated with her naivety, but I don't think he finds her that naive at all. When asking her to leave KL with him, that's what he does: he asks her! If she thought her naive, I don't think he'd give her a say on the matter at all. He doesn't think Arya's naive, and yet, whenever Arya disobeyes him, he just forces her to do what he wants. He appealed to Sansa's common sense, and you don't do that with people you find naive.

And, I see you posted one more time while I was typing this. I'll reply in my next post. You're faster than me, give me a fair chance.