Jump to content

Thunder Bunny-3000

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Thunder Bunny-3000

  1. Eddard Stark suspects their bastardy and questions Cercie in the godswood. he finds out it is Jaimie through this conversation. it isn't till after she admits she is lovers with Jaimie that Ned deduces that none of the children are Roberts but Jaimie's she again confirms it.
  2. she does think of Tywin. as he is leaving Harrenhal. she rushes to find Jaqen to change her second name only to arrive at the scene of Weese's death ordered by her whisper.
  3. the mental gymnastics you are going through to justify her willful ignorance is ridiculous. and yes the expectation is obedience. Sansa failed. she is guilty of disobedience hence she is has to share responsibility for the outcome. No, NOT that sansa feels ok. she isn't really acting out except in the bickering with Arya. she doesn't go missing. running off is an Arya thing, dangerous and against Ned's wishes. the talk with Arya is to cool the brewing anger between the two. they are both told pretty clearly what THEY need to not do. no. you said that: "she's comparable with actual people with power, with armies to enforce them, with the ability to dictate laws or demand the head of great lords and be obliged." and I also never said that Sansa intended a political fiasco to ensue only that her actions contributed. her actions do have political ramifications. anything she does is going to be political in some way., no different than Arya thwacking the prince. that is political. thinking you are going to change Ned's mind by getting the Queen involved is political. you made my point. Sansa whether she knew it or not was a player in the game of thrones. one does not have to be actively be playing to be a part. Robert is King it isn't cheating. however Cercei screwing Jaimie before every sexual encounter with Robert is treason. which is the greater crime? Cercies treason threw the entire realm into chaos. it doesn't matter if people have more power than Sansa that does not mean Sansa didn't contribute. acting out of love or lust is political because it has consequence. Cercie cucked the king and now with Robert dead the realm is in choas. her love and her lust was Treason. treason is political. running to Cercie when told not to tell anyone of their intentions is political, why because it effected things and Sansa becomes a prisoner directly because of this. her motivations to be Joffery's Queen is political. see Robb, Catelyn and Karstark even Jaimie all do things out of love or lust which change the political landscape because of it. so what, and Arya thinks sailing on a ship would be an adventure. Sansa's actions made her into Cercie's first captive. that is all on her own unless you are thinking that she was forced to Run to Cercie against her own will and blurt out secrets and the get locked in Maegors holdfast. well we know that isn't the case. she snuck off and she talked to the queen and she was locked away.- her fault entirely. the departure may not have been a secret. it's mission was. it did. I already stated that it secured Joffrey's legitimacy on the throne with the self incriminating confession. it declares that Joffery is a trueborn Baratheon.- this effects Robb Stark later as he see's Joffery as a legitimate King, Renly an usurper and Stannis though silent also one. We found this on the captain of your household guard, Sansa. It is a letter to my late husband’s brother Stannis, inviting him to take the crown.”- GOT the letter and the intent is enough to make Stannis the enemy just because declarations are not made right away does not men they weren't her enemies. Renly fled. as a royal counciller he shouold be there pledging fealty so he is already an enemy. as for Ned. he had a good reputation and his execution was unjustified as he was promised to nights watch. i notice some people disregard Martin's word when it fails to strengthen their argument and use it when it suits them. and yea we are not in dispute of this.-"Martin has implied that LF egged Joffrey to kill Ned and a mistreated valuable asset is a fragil one, as it can falter at any moment." it does. Ned was trying to leave several times no wanting anything to do with KL but circumstances kept him there. does not matter if kids understand or not. Arya assaulted the prince but as they are children it is dismissed. everyone in hierarchy in Westeros has a role and their function positive or negative intentional or unintentional is political. no. you said Arya was only in a serving position and I stated that maybe that is what Arya needs to become a good lady. that is it. in regards to noble women in general yes they serve. they have little agency so what they are told to do by their lords is what gets to happen. Noblewomen birthing heirs is serving the household otherwise she is a shit wife. sealing alliances through marriage that is serving their households too. managing the castle is in service to it's lord. you know peasants serve as well. they have the obvious roles in harvesting food, building things and being levies for armies by serving their direct overlord. squires serve knights and Lords until they become knights themselves. Queens serve the realm by producing trueborn princes and ensuring the continuing of the Dynasty the Nights watch serves to protect the relam from ancient evils and wildlings my point is that everyone has a role and it isn't obsurd. Sansa's station was that of a consort. marriage and breeding his her primary function. - she knows this by the way. Arya is a Lady whether she wills it or not, same as Sansa. and on the sansa arya path swap I disagree. Arya would survive both paths just fine. getting beat is abuse, not torture. Theon suffered torture. yea but she has yet to be framed for it like Tyrion.
  4. well we aren't discussing modern times. context is the story universe and that world that sets the rules. she is a highborn lady in a monarchy society. Anything she does will be political. her using the Queen is political. she is looking out for herself number one is Sansa - and as for sansa, her being disobedient bynot doing what she is told, is out of character for Sansa. possible but not guaranteed. is everything told to Ned the truth or is some a lie. putting Ned in a state of paranoia is an easy way to gain his trust by giving him nuggets of truth over time. doesn't mean the girls couldn't still escape. that isn't framing Sansa. Tyrion's trials was framing Tyrion for the murder of Joffery. Sansa is just blamed because she is married to Tyrion and she is conveniently missing. so Tyrion is Framed. Sansa is blamed. the difference. evidence is produced to incriminate Tyrion which condemns him unfairly. Sansa is just assumed guilty by association. Funny, Tyrion is completely innocent while Sansa has the means to commit the murder on her head.
  5. well then sansa really is that dim. Arya knows who her fathers men are , i'd expect Sansa would too. knowing that her father was attacked and people that they grew up with have died should be a point to consider. it is not a mistake as I said it should be obvious. but Sansa only has a mind for her fairytales. in the end it still comes down to Sansa's judgement and it was bad. Ned is not at fault in this. as she was aptly warned about danger and their safety. ha wicked as Arya means she knows she is being deliberately disobedient. she knows that she should not do what she is doing and still doing it anyway. she never considers the consequences. well we know she blames Arya for Lady's death and that is the source of contention between the two bickering all the time. and she still was doing better than Arya considering she had plenty of other distractions,the biggest being joffery and the tournament.
  6. Ned's guards protect him and his household. she is told what she needs to know but she also knows a lot that is beneficial to Cercie. it should be painfully obvious that they are in a hazardous place when he explicitly tells his children that he is sending them away for their own safety especially after his men are killed and he, injured. he tells them that. she is told not to let anyone know of their intentions. Sansa being more behaved would require less attention as she is not acting out of the ordinary nor is she misbehaving except in the cases that involve fighting with Arya. Also Arya is pretty much alone after her friend is dead and wolf forced away whereas Sansa is doing well, has a friend, lovesick with the prince and dazzled by the tournaments etc. Ned pays attention to who needs him most. Sansa was doing fine despite Lady's death. Arya was not. and anyway what you said does not excuse her misguided disobedience. I made no such claim. only that she is comparable in that her actions were involved political ramifications which in story is called the game of thrones. Besides, who has to be of equal station, for it to count? when was that a requirement? running off to Cercie was a political maneuver. Her interests coincide with politics. Marrying the Prince is political. Tattling to Cercie on the intentions to send them home via her father, Hand of the King, is political. Joffrey was her primary motivation not the rest. the rest were the cherry on top. sansa is described by Cercie as being wet with love for Joffrey. she was brought low by her own actions. Does not change that the escape Ned planned for his daughters was blown by Sansa.- Cercie may act still but may not have known where they would be or their intended route to leave. Sansa was always going to be a prisoner after any peace if made to keep Robb at bay. yea, it is because Cercie snatches her up the moment she divulges their escape intent. it fails because peace is never made with Robb due to the impulse execution of Lord Eddard Stark by King Joffrey Baratheon. she intended Sansa remain her hostage to ensure the terms were kept. - I don't think we were in disagreement of this. as for the confession: it was part of the agreement which certainty required Ned's cooperation in order to take the black. the confession did change things. it strengthened Joffery's claim to the throne while incriminating the starks and the rival Baratheons, Lord Stannis and Lord Renly as the aggressors in the war. Ned was never supposed to die. Joffery did that. they still have Sansa as a valuable asset. she did play, whether she knew it or not. she tried to influence things to allow her image of reality to continue. like I said before, it is playing politics as she tried to influence her father by getting the King to make Ned to let her stay but due to irrational fear of a fat man, she goes to Queen Cercie to prevent her leaving the city to stay with Joffery. Lady's serve their households they serve their husbands and depending on their station, they serve other ladies. birthing heirs and managing household are their primary duties unless they rule in their own right or in the stead of their Lord husbands. For example, Catelyn serves house Tully by marrying Ned in Brandon's stead. she serves house Stark by birthing heirs. she is tasked with educating Robb in preparation for war, and eventually serves him when he becomes the New head of House Stark and later, King. Lady Maege Mormont Serves her house as it's matriarch when Jorah Mormont is in exile and serves House Stark as a Vassal Lady, Dacey Mormont serves King Robb as a bodyguard and her Mother who is head of House Mormont. . Sansa is alive because she is a useful idiot and others take advantage of that and need her alive. Arya has this same experience when her identity is revealed with the brotherhood, she is valuable enough to be worth a ransom. you said that Arya was filling more of a serving role. so I gave my argument. you seem confused. you said she almost died in a riot. I agree, but no more than the others were at risk including Joffery. she is protected and kept safe by the lannisters. it was not Lannister men that assaulted the royal procession. as for being beaten its isn't the same as facing death. but tit for tat, Arya gets beaten as well. eh no Sansa may be being hunted but Tyrion is the target. technically she isn't framed, Tyrion is. every aspect of her standard of Living in KL is better than what Arya experiences. but that isn't the point. Arya has different challenges sure but she overcomes those, Sansa doesn't she is passed around after being knocked down a peg or two. Sansa was never in danger of death on a basis like that of Arya due to who Sansa is in the realm of politics, which is, a valuable asset to control. her escape was planned by others and her treatment was done by others, Sansa does very little on her own. but this isn't the oppression Olympics. the topic of the post was who was the worst player in the game of thrones. I consider it to be Sansa Stark as she did play and was terrible at it. and the tangential argument has been devolved to who is worse, Arya or Sansa. my point there is that Arya is more adaptable than Sansa was and would likely survive Kingslanding if the roles were reversed. Sansa being a pretty docile dimwit would likely be raped on the spot on the road without sufficient protection yet Arya's unkempt look gives her a leg up in that matter to play the boy role to escape. but neither serve to answer the question who is the stupidest player in the game of thrones.
  7. all thanks to Sansa spilling the beans of their departure. the ports get closed and the ship infiltrated. Ned was valuable and only lost his head by unforeseen circumstances and again had he been the only one, likely would not have happened. but plot contrivance has him die for war to go into full swing. the comparison between Sansa and Joffrey is not absurd. they are both privileged and entitled brats that hold substantial status in politics. he the prince, she the bride to be. Father’s mouth twitched strangely. “Sansa, I’m not sending you away for fighting, though the gods know I’m sick of you two squabbling. I want you back in Winterfell for your own safety. Three of my men were cut down like dogs not a league from where we sit, and what does Robert do? He goes hunting.” that is clear as day that safety is the issue. not everyone needs to be told every single detail to know why, but Sansa should be well aware of this especially since Ned himself is injured. you know, the difference here is that Sansa is the obedient one and has little need for complete and detailed explainations whereas Arya has runoff on the Kingsroad, got lost in the castle and has to constantly be reigned in to behave. and Explaination to Arya makes more sense. and Sansa was given no vague information so there is that. oh Sansa had power and she used it. she went to the Queen and bam! A prisoner she becomes. she had the power to obey. her actions were willfully disobedient. she isn't powerless. she had information and gave it freely. No she wanted to remain in King's landing and be Queen. her actions all center around her dream prince and her status as a future Queen. You misunderstood what I said. she got what she wanted which was to remain in kings landing with her prince, but it was a poisoned apple due to the cruelty of Joffrey and the death of Eddard Stark and of course her precarious position as a noble hostage rather than an honored lady of the court. she has been brought low by her own selfish desires and diminutive world view. her overcoming that is growth. ok so, doesn't change that the escape plan was blown by Sansa . and Ned was the most Valuable because he was a HighLord. doesn't mean his daughters would be useless. When he dies Sansa becomes more valuable because she is of the Stark family and Jaimie has been captured. later as the remaining Stark clan starts disappearing, Sansa's value skyrockets as the schemers all try to utilize her claim for their own benefits. ok so hypothetically Ned dies in black cells, their coup was successful and Sansa and Arya escape, the Lannisters will have little bargaining power as they have no hostages. so obviously if Ned is dying, they have an invested interest in keeping him alive to trade wile he is still breathing and end the war. And they have the lack of a confession which affirms Joffery as Robert's heir while portraying the Starks as the baddies. no. she played politics. that is the game. her intention was to get them to prevent her from leaving King's landing to be with joffery and become his future queen. as to your assertion I read the bolded below. Lady's serve do they not? Arya has been in a serving role for a lot of the books were Sansa has been in a served position. this in no way means Arya cannot be a lady. she has the same education as her sister. and I guess that depends too on the type. is she a lady by courtesy, as a consort, or a ruling noblewoman? she plays the role of a boy to keep her identity a secret why not as a lady if the situation presented itself? being a servant could be what Arya needs to be a good lady. Arya learns restraint and learns to keep her mouth shut. unfortunately Sansa is submitting not restraining. being beaten is not the same as getting murdered, executed or tortured to death. Sansa's near miss was the bread riots in king's landing, but then again so were Joffery and Tommen's lives. almost died at blackwater.... threats are one thing,surviving an attempt is another. , oh framed yes and then whisked away like she was never there so her husband gets the blame. she and Tyrion are blamed not just Sansa. Tyrion getting thwacked in the face was almost getting killed. the difference is that people are not hunting her with an invested reason to kill Sansa. she isn't going hungry or looking for a place to stay etc. in a way Arya being incognito puts her in danger slightly more because her value is not known exept when it does become known by the brotherhood and then Sandor. Sansa is not in danger because of the value others have in her. they have an invested interest to keep her alive. yea sure Cercie could have slaughtered them all to prevent them becoming prizes of Stannis but that never happens not even close. Sansa is also catered to, well fed, dressed, has servants and freedom of the castle as opposed to Arya who has to find food, work her ass off and hope not be noticed by those who would do harm on her or her little pack.
  8. they were not trapped regardless. the boat in which is daughters were supposed to leave on would and could have saved them had Sansa not intervened. Ned himswelf knew he was valuable as a hostage, and his intent was to stay while his family escaped. ok so ned had fewer men. doesn't mean his cause was lost just yet. stealth was getting his daughters out of KL. Sansa blew it. age is no excuse for her actions. if people cannot excuse Joffery's cruelty because of age, Sansa should not get that privilege either. he told them both. Father’s mouth twitched strangely. “Sansa, I’m not sending you away for fighting, though the gods know I’m sick of you two squabbling. I want you back in Winterfell for your own safety. Three of my men were cut down like dogs not a league from where we sit, and what does Robert do? He goes hunting.” no, not really. Bran and theon were princes not kings. Catelyn, Peterfinger, Varys are all not Kings, yet they do the dance as well. Renly was a king only because Mace Tyrell had him crowned, Mace is just a High Lord. so yet Sansa is comparable. oh yes that is correct. she became a pawn the moment she lost control. her self delusion made her think she was and she did. she meddllied into her fathers politicking and became a noble hostage. her willful neglect of her fathers wishes for her own selfish desire is her playing the game of thrones. in Sansa's case she has the eye on a Queenship as Joffrey's consort. My mistake, her intervention prevents her own escape as she is locked up. she is in Lannister custody when Ned is betrayed. would Cercie be so bold had she not had Sansa in her pocket. maybe, maybe not. renly said it best he who controls the king controlled the kingdom. Sansa came to her willingly and then Cercie had a means to control Ned. really? what doesn't make sense? her selfish desire led to her selfish actions that gave her a wish which was a poisoned apple. she got what she wanted at first. Stay in kings landing yet she loses everything. - i'm just being objective. she is guilty for some of the events that go down, no need to absolve her of it as she won't have any character growth if you take away her negligent behavior. why wouldn't they make it. if they were safely out of KL, they are at the very least not captives of the Lannisters to be used against him or with him included. had he been the only valuable hostage at play, they would need to use him as leverage as intended. no need for a public confession, maybe a trade of captives for peace. having him alive is valuable. the only reason he gets axed is because he openly confesses to treason and Joffrey takes the reigns. if he was the only one, he'd likely remain in the black cells until needed to call off Robb Stark and co. the fact is Sansa being held prisoner influences his decision to confess. if still brought befiore baelor's sept and he refused the confession and still died, Joffery would be in a negative light right off the bat. who knows with his daughters out of Lannister reach, he could proclaim Stannis King for all to hear and still lose his head. heck, his plan was for the boat to pass by Dragonstone first and deliver the message to Stannis. maybe his daughters become guests or hostages of Stannis to ensure Robb's loyaty. who knows. uh huh, just the field, nope, she does pretty well otherwise. Naw that's rubbish. as stated befor, had Arya been in her position she would fall in line. at Harrenhall she did just that. oh and she wouldn't be killed because she would be more valuable alive. Sansa is not ever really in danger of dying in KL as she is wanted whole for political reasons. if they had arya instead of Sansa would that be any different? nope Sansa's claim and those invested in it, keep her alive, not Sansa herself. and the whole reason why Sansa and Arya were in King's landing was to learn the ways of a southern court. she has more witts about her than Sansa does and adapting to life in captivity would not be hard for Arya. I am just curious why would Arya die?
  9. ratting out her family in king's landing greatly contributed to Cercie's ability to prevent their escape and in the process slaughter the Stark household guards. Sansa herself becomes a prisoner of the war after giving Cercie her contributions. being terrified of Robert is a stupid excuse. it still doesn't change what she did. Ned told them about the danger and that is why he was sending them back to Winterfell. he also instructed too hkeep their departutre a secret. a secret which Sansa spoiled. she does not have to be a queen to play the game of thrones. she had great influence on the events that transpired which include again her own captivity, the Arrest of Ned, her sister's near capture etc. the position in King's kllanding really was Queenship which is why she did not want to leave. she made her play with Cercie and was promptly arrested. then she begged the king and Ned lost his head. then she is disinherited by Robb after being married to the imp after she foiled her own getaways with the hound, or the Tyrells. instead of usingh her position she is just a bimboheaded pawn. - no worries that makes her interesting. had his daughter's escaped, there would be little to coerce him to falsely confess with. false, Arya is more adaptable than Sansa and has shown throughout the books that had the roles been reversed, Arya would fall in line and would be just as valuable as Sansa. why because Sansa is the only Stark they have after Ned is killed, why could Arya be any different?
  10. well she made her bid to be Queen and everyone around her died. so she was a player just unwittingly so.
  11. Danny just wasn't raped. not by the standards of asoiaf. sure in 2020 it would be but in her case absolutely not. She never once thinks of any of her sexual experiences as such and never thinks ill of Drogo. marriage is political not romantic. in Danny's case it seems to be a bit of both.
  12. the times are just your guess. and no it is still sansa's fault for getting captured. the only incredible event that occurs is Sansa sneaking off to the Queen. despite your timeline. the critical maneuver was preventing Ned and co. from leaving by ship. priority is the ship. Cercie didn't know Ned would stay, so cutting off his potential escape make sense. that was Sansa's goal was to stay in KL. so subverting that Ned is stuck just like the rest. the Wind Witch is pivotal in her plans. doesn't matter. betrothals are not permanent. it isn't a hardened commitment that the eventual final outcome would be if followed to completion. her life isn't hers to give anyway, it is her lord father's.he is the hand of the King First, then Lord of Winterfell, then her father. he broke it off abruptly, there is nothing wrong with that. that is the conflict, he is not the rightful heir. without it. there would be no book I suppose. Ned was not a traitor, hence the War of the 5 Kings. no she doesn't have to look convincingly harmless because that is just what she was. that was her character. nothing wrong with that either. being a rebel in court is an option. she only chose once to do so and it was directed at the wrong Lannister. and the arrangements to send them home is precisely the reason she is captured, the retinue slaughtered at the stables, in process of leaving, the Wind Witch being taken care of, as well as the tower of the hand being assaulted. Sansa could have repeated what Ned told her; Prince Joffrey is no prince Aemon or simple he's ruining everything. but what is consistent in the books is the plan to send her away. in Ned's pov we know he alone was prepared to stay while his daughters left by sea to deliver the message to Stannis at Dragonstone on the way North. Cercie was given information that was useful to her coup, that is certain. the truth: NED's plan to send them back to Winterfell by sea. he never confides in her: um yes he does. He tells them at breakfast why they are leaving. confide means to trust,. he told the girls to tell no one of there plans to leave. why would he not confide in her, she behaves herself more often than not. Sansa knows almost nothing. Sansa knew a lot more than she realized and was an unwitting participant in the slaughter of her father's household. Cercie isn't whitewashing her own scheming. she seems pretty proud. she attributes her success to Sansa which suprises Tyrion. Cercie's bit was the slaughter, Sansa's was the information. plan or plans it makes no matter, she still receive valuable intel in Ned's likely next move, from sansa, and acted upon it. Plans could still be in reference to Ned's daughters being sent home on a ship. in AFFC, she could be lumping in the plan to sit Stannis on the throne. ie. plans
  13. Ned wanted them ready to leave by noon. the coup was likely mis to late morning. Ned has breakfast where sansa runs off, then Ned is confronted by Pycelle an hour or so later about Roberts death and then Ned calls for the councillers to meet him in his solar. after that they all go to the throne room to confront Joffrey.- that takes time. Sansa was the first prisoner of the coup. and she wasn't in the tower of the hand Jeyne and Arya were. Sansa was locked away in Maegors holdfast. she was escorted to the tower and locked away and a few hours later the fighting started. you are right, leaving wasn't a possibility because Sansa blew it. “It was for love,” Sansa said in a rush. “Father wouldn’t even give me leave to say farewell.” She was the good girl, the obedient girl, but she had felt as wicked as Arya that morning, sneaking away from Septa Mordane, defying her lord father. She had never done anything so willful before, and she would never have done it then if she hadn’t loved Joffrey as much as she did. “He was going to take me back to Winterfell and marry me to some hedge knight, even though it was Joff I wanted. I told him, but he wouldn’t listen.” The king had been her last hope. The king could command Father to let her stay in King’s Landing and marry Prince Joffrey, Sansa knew he could, but the king had always frightened her. He was loud and rough-voiced and drunk as often as not, and he would probably have just sent her back to Lord Eddard, if they even let her see him. So she went to the queen instead, and poured out her heart, and Cersei had listened and thanked her sweetly . . . only then Ser Arys had escorted her to the high room in Maegor’s Holdfast and posted guards, and a few hours later, the fighting had begun outside. “Please,” she finished, “you have to let me marry Joffrey, I’ll be ever so good a wife to him, you’ll see. I’ll be a queen just like you, I promise.” the knowledge of their imminent departure is the most valuable piece of information that Cercie could use. Sansa got what she wanted and remained in Kingslanding after sneaking off to the Queen. and yes I already stated they were valuable hostages. her motivations on tattling on her own father was selfish in nature. becoming joffery's Queen is selfish in nature. remaining in King's landing is selfish in nature. sure i'll give you this thought wasn't necessarily selfish but it is definitely motivated by her selfish desires. it depends on the view. We know Ned is not a traitor. but after he confesses he makes himself out to be a traitor with his own words. also traitors are executed, sent to the wall, or pardoned. traitors blood was just nonsense to scare Sansa. ok. except sansa was betrothed to Joffery. decorum must be held to maintain a sense of innocence in the coup. she is a noble hostage and is treated according to her rank. she has freedom of the castle and has escorts guarding her at times and servants to meet her necessities. the castle is her prison. again she would not be in a prison cell especially after Ned's death and Jamie captured. and No. Cercie feeling giddy with excitement when things go her way is a sign of truth. I think it was in AFFC where she's thinks to herself that she hasn't felt this giddy or elated since Sansa bore her father's secrets to her. -she is an idiot regardless.
  14. Sansa becomes a prisoner when she goes to the queen. the opportunity to escape was on the boat as planned. she blows that out of the water by informing the Queen of their immediate departure. the willful act of sneaking off to the Queen is Sansa's fault. hense her own capture is her fault too. are you saying she was not a valuable hostage? that she wasn't the first hostage? read through Cercie's chapters in all the books she reflects from time to time of Sansa's contributions to her coup. and even stating at some point that Sansa was always going to be a prisoner in KL even if Robb swore fealty to Joffery yes she was thinking of Ned but also thinking of herself. describing Ned as a traitor in her handwriting is her consenting to that idea. she also immediately declares that Arya is the one with traitors blood. so yea she calls her family traitors. Arya herself is not a pawn of the Lannisters. Jeyne Poole is.
  15. Sansa was responsible for her own capture. had she remained obedient she may have escaped and no one could force Ned to confess. the chief reason of course is to save Sansa's life whether that was an empty threat or not. nice bringing up Joffrey. Sansa was infatuated with the little barbarian. she was extremely ignorant. so what. losing a little skin is better than losing the only head you have. problem is, we as readers know of joffery's nature, sansa has had a glimpse. Sansa's intentions relied on a cruel individual that she believes is her prince chawming. the decision for Sansa to write the letters was an effort to please Cercie. this act alone is further showing her ignorance as she still foolishly believes she has influence. she doesn't she is being used. she is disowning her family in the process by outing them all as traitors. point is Sansa was not beaten into submission here this was her choice. boo hoo. she lost the game of thrones- and lived..... mayhaps she was never a player but a pawn. Yes Sansa was a Lannister pawn. she is used to coerce Ned into a confession. she slanders her family. her person is valuable at the start of the war in a potential prisoner exchange for Jaimie. yes with Ned's death that goes out the window. her claim is valuable to the Lannisters and they seize that opportunity befor the Tyrells could. Again Sansa was a valuable hostage and the first taken captive before the rest of the Stark household was slaughtered. yes high treason holds the penalty of death. Cercie deserves that as she is certainty guilty of it. everyone dies after her capture. Yep she threw her family under the bus for her selfish desires. eh I don't think it would be seen negatively. Bran surrendered and told the people tp surrender in an effort to keep them alive. this contrasts with Sansa's behavior where she calls her betrays her family and calls them traitors. had it been Sansa doing exactly as Bran, she would be seen like Bran. on another note, Sansa being an ignoramus isn't a bad thing. we see her start out as an entitled snot, if she ever grows and makes a comeback, it's more rewarding character growth. if sansa could be exonerated for her stupidity I guess Joffrey should be for his cruelty. the main difference is their motivations and actions, not our pre-judgements of their actions. - we judge them after they have done something or lack of.
  16. Sansa was not trying to prevent a war. she was willful in her actions and ignorant of the situation. her only concern was her social status. Sansa's plan did not work because it wasn't her influence that kept ned alive. Her plan relied on Joffery conforming to her intentions and it failed. While Ned was rotting in the black Cells as a prisoner, it was the threat to Sansa's life that made Ned confess, not Sansa's pleas for mercy. they never intended to kill him and saying that Sansa convinced the queen to keep him alive is ridiculous. she was Cercie's pawn in that whole scenario. and her selfish nature is all I really blamed her for. it caused a ruckus and got her captured. as for the beheading. that blame goes to Joffery.
  17. *Sansa also had it in her mind that Ned would just be exiled for a couple years and after she was wed and married to Joffrey she could convince Joffrey to let Ned come back. this is all stemming from her ignorance of the situation. She willfully writes the letters to her family in response to this because she intends to please the queen. she did terrible. why? because she failed, she was played for the fool that she was and used to Cercie's advantage. **The difference is that Sansa was ignorant of her situation while Bran was not. Bran's people were held at swordpoint while Sansa was an unwitting but willing participant.
  18. I believe it is chainmail gloves that Sansa is hit by. as to her unfortunate demise at the hand with mail, it would still deny use of Sansa Stark by the enemies of house Lannister.
  19. well she wasn't useless as she was used against Ned Stark. she was a prized hostage of the crown after the fall of the North. she was a noble hostage and as such was valuable to have or deny anyone else of having as well. she was not in danger of being violently murdered. except in like two situations. the bread riots and the Battle of Blackwater.
  20. nope. and irrelevant. the Northern and Riverlords declared him king. that makes him one. instead of swearing oaths to him as their lord they did so to him by making him a King. SIMPLE the 5 year jump is hasn't happened and not likely going to,so again irrelivent. the will is supposed to be in the next book. but we will have to wait and see if it comes to nought. *as I said, they can always swear again as they do all the time. **Blackfish makes it clear when talking to Jaimie at the siege of Riverrun *Edmure is one man we agree. a hostage promised treatment befitting his rank. he is still a knight. you are deliberately sidestepping. yes the riverlords have bent to the iron throne after having lost in battle or conceded based on the hostages taken. they swore fealty to the Robb Stark as King, then to the Iron throne when they were forced to. doesn't mean they cant do it for the next stark that pops up. **declaring Robb a King, then fighting a war in support of that king and kingdom makes him legitimate. some might see symbols of power as legitimate means to kingship like the iron throne, having dragons, wearing a crown, controlling territory, establishing a new dynasty or blood quantum etc. avoiding usurpation of the iron throne, they became an independent entity. their support for this makes Robb a legitimate king homage and fealty is what makes a person a Lord. Robb had those from lords who called him King. Viserys was a King, he was crowned one. Stannis is the only one calling himself King of Westeros. ***. Henry VII and HenryVIII destroyed opposition to establish their claim. pretenders would be those who seek the same throne as the establishment. so in a way you are right. THE Baratheon bloodline is the established Dynasty that is struggling for control of the 7 Kingdoms. to the Henrys' any someone claiming the throne would be a pretender. this is after the dynasty is established on the throne of England. but hey back to Westeros, Jeyne Poole is a false pretender as she is no Arya Stark. if no one recognizes any true stark remaining should they appear, they might be considered pretenders especially if they have no way to prove whome they are while claiming their rights. but all the kings are pretenders while the one sitting on the throne is an usurper due to his bastard status. see he has no Baratheon blood so has no legitimacy to the throne of the establ;ished Dynasty, the Baratheons of Kings Landing(which really exists in name only) ****the prisoners are people connected to Lords or are Lords themselves. this is what makes them break. they do dictate who the king is by their status and position in society.Hens those that declared for their respective Kings. forcing them into surrendering and swearing oaths are ways of doing this as well. I argue that a king determines who his subjects are just as the vassals determining who their king is. so it goes both ways. YOU: Jon could have been a legitimate King, could have started a new dynasty with sons, brothers, sisters or even cousins inheriting his crown. Sadly he died a pretender, at a wedding on his way home to try and win the North back. - unless you meant Robb, my response had to do with this. I guess I have to concede: all the Kings in Westeros are pretenders to someone. Stannis is the King that has the legitimacy by blood and by Law, his problem is that he needs to prove his claims and secure the iron throne as he claims the realm of Westeros. he doesn't control Westeros so, he is only a pretender as an usurper is on his throne. like I said it is a matter of perspective. to those that control the iron throne because Cercie's children are Baratheons in Name. they are Baratheons not Waters. pretender is a claimant. robb did not claim the iron throne, he is an usurper to Stannis, not a pretender as he isn't contesting his claim to the iron chair. however, Balon contests his control of the North and then it makes Robb and Balon mutually pretenders ie claimants to the North. You are missing the point. Bran and Rickon are Princes. with out Robb's will, Bran is his heir if he were to surface. He is a Prince and would be recognized as such until he surrenders that title, same for Rickon and Arya. - and Yes they really were. they were referred to as such. they may be considered usurpers or pretenders when they surface despite their legitimacy. just because it didn't happen in ADWD doesn't mean it wont happen in the next book. the North is a separate region than the riverlands. the riverlands declaring for Robb is foreign legitimacy. again the lords and vassals fighting for him and under him are giving him legitimacy. in the case of civil war it is the vassal houses that determine legitimacy. 1. I could argue Queen Cercie is the Lannister doing so. her regency and legitimacy is based of her bastards calling themselves kings. 2. no they are Baratheons- not true Baratheons mind you and definitely not waters. they are not recognized bastards, despite being bastards. 3.&4. I think that is the problem. the realm was never fully unified. seriously think on it. how can you have 7 kingdoms with one King? Stannis has got it right: King of Westeros, not King of 7. they remain divided in culture and in how they operated. Legitimacy comes in many forms. as I stated above somewhere. you seem to think that for one to have legitimacy they must sit the iron throne and only that. as the regional differences separate faiths, Robb's didn't need to be blessed by the high septon, that isn't a prerequisite. Stannis is himself godless but some of his followers support a different religion altogether so no need for the high septon there either. does every kingdom need a small council like in Kingslanding? nope has no bearing on legitimacy anyway. we agree. Cerci's bastards are it. but their rights are contested by those that fight them. Danny could. Not hung up on Robb in particular. this thread is about whether anyone would support his will. Robbs vassals would be the primary upholders of his will if they choose to follow it. that is my position. so what if his reign was less than a year. Jene Grey was queen for like a week and a half. Love Robb. Love Stannis more. Robb's vassals elected war. they will want it again especially after the red wedding. Robb's will hasn't surfaced yet. they did not ignore it. as for his kingdom dying, that depends on the will.
  21. Yep oaths to the crown at sword point. nothing is decided yet. Rebellion is still ripe in the North. they wanted the Blackfish and he makes it clear that the war isn't done while he still lives. he is still at large. Emmon Frey seems to be upset that Edmure is still alive as that is a threat to his legitimacy in Riverrun. Edmure isn't dead. the Stoneheart outlaws are still at large. the war isn't over yet. Why did they bend? hmmm ax yerself that. mostly due to hostages taken. Jon could have been King? Ha no, he was not offered anything more than the Lordship of Winterfell by Stannis and Robb's declared heir is not known to the reader. it Seems that Robb lost his seat , so did Stannis but that did not make them any less kings.Robb was not a pretender for the Northern throne because he was the king of the North and the Trident. he still has heirs declared and believed dead. Bran is still a Prince and Rickon is a Prince. Arya is still a Princess, all possible claimants if they so chose. he does not need legitimacy from the iron throne to be a King. the only real pretenders to any throne are the Lannisters, but then again it is a matter of perspective; Danny thinks anyone not Targaryen is a pretender. so, yep they swore new allegiances so did renly's host. the Tyrells made a bid for the throne with Renly and continued that stance with the Lannisters in direct opposition of Stannis. Stannis swelling ranks prior to Blackwater swore vows to him and then Renly's ghost made them bend in direct opposition to Stannis again. why would the Stark loyalist not do the same if and when given the chance. fighting the Boltons and the Ironborn are the common goals that they and Stannis have. they have sworn new allegiance. so what. they can do so again.
  22. read the book again. Robb's will was to ensure that the kingdom does not die with him. oh and he was no pretender. Robb's will is not meaningless as it was written for the event of his death. at least those that signed his document it means a great deal.
  • Create New...