Jump to content

the trees have eyes

Members
  • Posts

    2,155
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by the trees have eyes

  1. 23 minutes ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

    He's forced to dose the kid against his will and then, when delivering an ultimatum, the response we get is "We'll see what your boss says." Colemon is bartering with people far more powerful than him. And more to the point, she doesn't give any option of back talk. She immediately leaves the room he's in and tells herself she and LF have larger concerns than the boy in the same chapter that LF tells her to be careful around Myranda Royce, which she repeats to herself multiple times. 

    She clearly thinks the longer term effects on SR are worth the short term safety for herself.

    She doesn't understand the long term effects on Robert (and nor do we) as they aren't explained beyond "it remains in the flesh".  She clearly believes the unspecified risk to him is outweighed by the short term benefit of getting him down the mountain (and a possible second dose to get him through the feast).  She clearly understands the importance of him getting down the mountain alive and not having a fit in front of his bannermen (from whom he is all but hidden at The Eyrie in the normal course of events) but at no point in any of this is she dosing him because she feels threatened and sees dosing him a way of keeping herself safe.  And her safety relies on keeping him alive and LF in power as his protector, surely.

    Colemon can refuse and say it's too risky and then explain why.  If she told him to give Robert The Tears of Lys or The Strangler he would say no.  It's true that he agrees against his better judgment because he understands the medical risks and she doesn't but he does agree.  She leaves after he agrees to two doses, the point he makes is there must be no further doses after that for a period of six months.  And no one is there to guide his hand to administer it.  If he really thinks it's too dangerous he can opt not to.

    In terms of short term safety for herself I suppose, yes, you could argue that she would not have got him across the ice bridge without fitting without sweetsleep so she was percipient to push Colemon for the first dose.  Otherwise they would both be dead.  That's the kind of circumstance that might warrant a further does of sweetsleep within six months despite Colemon's warnings.  What happens in this hypothetical situation is all in the future.

    Beyond that I guess we'll agree to disagree.

  2. 14 hours ago, Darth Sidious said:

    It is from a scene where Sansa was informed of the dangers of giving the boy more of the sedating drug. She decides to proceed while knowing the danger. She knowingly endangers the life of the child.

    My man, read the passages again and show me where Colemon tells Sansa that giving Robert sweetsleep is endangering his life.  What he tells her is that "it remains in the flesh" and that he must not be prescribed more until six months have elapsed, after the two doses which he agrees to, sets the dosage of and administers himself.  This after he has questioned Sansa on Robert's physical condition - nosebleeds - to determine whether it is safe to administer these two doses.  Presumably he reviews Robert's physical condition before the feast to decide whether the second dose is safe or even necessary at all.

    What Sansa knows is that sweetsleep has both benefits and side effects.  What a thirteen year old knows of the dangers is what Maester Colemon tells her, which is precious little, other than that they must be careful not to administer too much or too often.

    To say she knowingly endangers his life is wrong.  To say so while ignoring her leading him over the ice bridge on the descent that same day is myopic.

    1 hour ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

    And that nuance rendered moot when she tells him to administer more later that night or soon thereafter.

    It's really not.  He warns vaguely of side effects but not specifics and not clearly and he agrees to two doses, saying there must be no more after that for six months.  If it's going to risk killing him Colemon would come right out and say it, surely? 

    If on the other hand you subscribe to the view that Colemon knows he is killing him then by all means argue that Colemon doesn't want to implicate himself and suspects that "Alayne" is in on it too but pretending ignorance so Colemon can be framed for doing it while the instigators, LF / "Alayne"', plead ignorance and assert that he is the maester responsible for Robert's care.  In other words they are dancing round each other in this scene.

    But from her pov what she knows of sweetsleep and how it works (hell, what we know) is very little, nothing at all really until Colemon gives a veiled and partial disclosure.  Thirteen year old Sansa, given the responsibility of getting Robert down the mountain and looking his best for his bannermen, has a powerful medicine that can help with all that and some vague warnings about not prescribing too much or too often - and a maester who agrees to two doses rather than telling her he won't do that because of a lethal risk to Robert.

    If he ever tells her that then there's a conversation to be had.  But right now it's like milk of the poppy, something to be given in certain circumstamnces but not too much or too often.

  3. 10 hours ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

    The exact quotes are a page or two back but once in the eyrie for the descent and then two more at gates of the moon (?) for the feast and when he meets his banner man. Then when the maester tells her no more for at least six months she says “we’ll see what my dad says” and drops the mic. 

    As far as I can see there is one conversation at The Eyrie about getting Robert Arryn down the mountain and through the subsequent feast/dinner without a shaking fit.  You are correct that Sansa advocates for a cup of sweetmilk before the descent and a second before the dinner but this is a total of two doses.  Something which Colemon agrees to it must be noted, if reluctantly, which hardly sets an alarm bell ringing that this is poisoning him.  It's a medical treatment with side effects that confer risks that don't appear to outweigh the benefits to her non-medical mind.  The dosage is of course left to Colemon.  Does he receive the second dose and what if any is Sansa's involvement beyond the suggestion at The Eyrie that morning?

    Colemon says there must be no more for at least half a year after this and she says he will have to take it up with her father but that last remark invites the understanding that it would be conditional on circumstances arising where sweetmilk would be necessary or advocated for rather than administered as a routine prescription dose.  If his fits get worse and he injures himself they may have to decide on treatment vs no treatment despite the greater risk of administering it.  No one can predict the future and events may force a choice to be made.

    I really don't see this as evidence of Sansa deliberately embarking on a programme of upping the frequency and dosage of his medication despite being warned against it - as the poster I originally eye-rolled at presented it as.  I see why some people project this forward to see Sansa becoming LF's protégé "Alayne" in truth or perhaps an independent yet darker version of herself but this is conjecture for the future not something to be presented in the present tense.

  4. 6 hours ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

    She doesn't order higher doses, but she does order additional doses with the implication there will probably be more. So with the sweet sleep not leaving the flesh, it will have a more detrimental effect.

    When does she order or administer additional doses?

  5. On 3/19/2024 at 2:04 AM, JoyfulJoy said:

    Okay it seems I need to qualify, I did not make things clear enough, so that's on me.

     I was not meaning anyone who thought that Sansa either directly or indirectly kill Sweetrobin, but rather a select group of people here, I think either some of them might be trolls, or even the "fan who really hates the starks and loves Dany" that I've read about.

    This thread did actually start as a Stark hate thread (there are a number of posters who regularly start or join threads bashing Arya, Jon, Sansa, Bran and Cat and you'll notice who they are in time) but morphed into a pretty good discussion of where GRRM might be heading with the Alayne persona.

    Sansa ONCE pushing for sweetsleep on the day they need to get Robert down the mountain (that day of all days) does not a cousin murderer make.  Indeed she spends a great deal of time at The Eyrie looking after him and pitying him.  I find it particularly surprising that people ignore that it's the same day that she advocates for a pinch of sweetsleep that she leads him across the narrow ice bridge at considerable risk to herself.  He fits immediately afterwards.  We can legitimately ask if he survives this without sweetsleep. Or whether she does.  It's a one-off measure in an extremely time critical situation - they have to get down the mountain right away or they'll be trapped; almost all of the servants and guards have already gone and the weather is closing in.

    The reason it's a hot topic is Sansa's internal thoughts in her Alayne persona sometimes appear to be aligning with LF's worldview which opens up the possibility of her becoming LF's child rather than Cat & Ned's child.  The girl who responded to Cersei's advice to make the people fear her with the thought "I will make them love me instead" seems to me no more likely to heed LF's ruthless, manipulative, cynical and murderous advice than Cersei's.  But just like she played a part in Joffrey's Court in KL - "I don't have the traitor blood", "I'm a good girl" etc... - she's playing a part in The Vale as LF's daughter.  Unlike in KL where she could hope for Robb's victory or the promise of "Come to the godswood if you want to go home" she has no such hope in The Vale so her options seem even more limited.  It's this, I think, which leads the non-Stark-haters to believe she will be caught in LF's trap and become his pawn. 

    I think Robert Arryn is just as likely to be the means by which the Sansa / Alayne dilemma and LF's hold over Sansa could be resolved as she decides once again to protect the innocent or helpless Robert (as with Dontos on Joffrey's birthday).  But GRRM has isolated her so effectively he'll have to write in some means for her to escape this bind (Bronze Yohn Royce (who almost recognised her), Lady Waynwood, or even a missing Blackfish returning to The Vale to seek support; plus the Lannister disintegration at KL and the Bolton collapse in The North making a good time for a Stark heir to re-emerge).  That of course puts her back in the position of people competing over her for her claim, the last thing she wants, but none of the characters have ever really had good choices.

  6. Honestly no one is definitely safe but I would be surprised if Tyrion, Bran or Arya died.  Likewise I think Sansa, Jon and Sam will survive. 

    Asha and Davos are probable survivors but expendable. 

    Arianne and Theon are possibilities as are The Hound, Meera and Jojen Reed, Hodor, Ghost and Summer.

    Dany, Jaime, Cersei, Euron, Victarion, Aeron, JonCon and Stannis, Doran, Tommen, Myrcella, Margery, Loras, multiple Sand Snakes, (F)Aegon, Selyse, Shireen and Jorah Mormont are all toast.  Varys and LF too.

    Areo Hotah: would we even notice either way?  That axe has more personality.

  7. Nah, he, Rorge and Biter very nearly burn to death in that wagon.  It's pure luck (for them) that Arya happens to come by heading for the tunnel and throw them the axe.  They are seconds away from dying.

    And Jaqen is serious about repaying those three lives.  He hangs around Harrenhall for ages to repay them and nearly bricks himself when Arya tells him his is the third name.

    I think the simplest explanation for Jaqen is as a character with a formative role in Arya's arc and development.  The Black Cells, his being bound in the wagon, his mysterious purpose in KL in the first place are all pretty irrelevant.  GRRM is a gardener and put in a cool character with a specific story role (re Arya) and a blank space backstory he cold fill in if and when he desired and then expanded his role with another mysterious purpose off in Oldtown - one which will be explained more clearly we imagine.  Maybe he'll tie those purposes together but like Syrio or Yoren (or The Hound) he's one of Arya's protectors who are stripped away or abandon her one after the other and it's what he's up to now that matters.

    I can't see much reason to hire him to off Ned who never wanted the Handship, already tried to resign once and once he's agreed to take the Black his honour will hold him there.  The reason Jaqen goes north is because the author wants to use him in Arya's story not to strike at a target at WF or The Wall (places he does not subsequently visit).

  8. 2 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

    Your meaning is incorrect.

    I am using the dictionary meaning.  You are either misunderstanding the word or twisting it for some bizarre reason to suit your own purposes.  You can repeat this line of argument ad nauseam (and it seems you will) but it just seems rather silly.

    2 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

    This is 100 percent borne out by the text. It is the actual, verifiable and confirmed situation in the realm. I think you are confusing "borne out by the text" with "outright stated." But there are all kinds of truths in asioaf that are not stated, starting with RLJ. If you can't accept that, then there is nothing more to say.

    No, it's not.  The Tyrells are on the up in alliance with House Lannister.  They are not afraid of utter extermination at the hands of House Lannister and instead intend to play the game smartly and surpass them in influence and power.  Tywin has no intention of getting into a conflict with the Tyrells, whom he needs, let alone exterminating them.  They know this very well.  So does the reader.

    You are making a wild exaggeration and rather mind-bogglingly insisting that it's fact.  That doesn't fly.

    2 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

    He is unreachable. He is at the center of the head table, right next to Cersei and the Tyrells and the king and the queen, where all eyes will be focused all night long. It would be very odd for Lady Olenna to be camped out there, in plain view of everyone, rather than way down the side, out of sight from nearly the entire room.

    He is not nailed to his seat.  And if he were he would still be reachable.  Particularly if someone had decided to, ooh, I don't know, slip a bit of poison in his pigeon pie, maybe?  I think someone had an idea that might have happened to someone at the wedding somehow. :rolleyes:

    2 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

    But as I went on to explain, which you continue to ignore, is that the fact remains that killing Tywin does not solve anything right now. The point here is to keep House Lannister from getting the north. Only Tyrion's death and Sansa's extraction can do that.

    I don't see any factual inaccuracy or misrepresentation in this statement of yours hence I had no further comment.  I don't agree with your reasoning as I've already said but I don't see any reason to argue over it.

    2 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

    Lol, you haven't refuted anything. The Reach is the most powerful house, militarily and economically. It has been this way for thousands of years. They do have the largest army. They do not have any natural barriers to speak of. Tywin's command of practically the rest of the kingdom does pose a grave threat, because the Reach has no other way of defending itself. This is not rhetoric. These are facts, unambiguous, clearly stated facts right from the text. The only thing this discussion proves is that some people are better at drawing conclusions from actual facts than others.

    This is funny.  You seem unable or unwilling to focus specifically on what I am saying and are just repeating yourself.  You know exactly what three statements of yours I am referring to and none of them are correct as I have pointed out to you in very clear and simple terms.  The Reach is an ally, not a target of the Lannisters so it's all very interesting to hear your geo-political analysis and your inferred wisdom that everyone in The Reach is quaking in their boots at the thought of Tywin, Destroyer of Worlds, turning on them next and unleashing Armageddon but it's not at all true.  It's quite funny seeing you push this so doggedly.

    2 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

    Sure, everyone can pitch their own ideas, but not their own facts. And the vast majority of facts used to support the wine are completely imaginary. So it is not just my take, it is the only conclusion drawn from actual, verifiable facts in the text, not just words. Realize that.

    Hmm...  You rely on Joffrey saying it's the pie.  Is that a verifiable fact in your view?  I hope you realise he might be wrong about this.  No, please don't give me a long boring response about how it could only possibly be in the pie.  You've done that for years.  I know you think that but the issue is other people don't.

    And do you mean verifiable facts like Olenna's dread of The Reach being sown with the skulls of Tyrell infants? :)

    3 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

    We don't need an "additional motivation" for Petyr's self-preservation. The embezzlement alone is enough. Nobody is going to give a rat's ass if Tyrion, without proof, claims that Petyr lied about the dagger, especially when he was not even present to hear what was actually said. And since multiple people can attest to the fact that Robert won the dagger, not Tyrion, then this whole story is laughable.

    You do realise that comment was not even addressed to you, yes?  And that is was a supplementary comment in support of motivations for LF to act rather than a refutation or an argument against the motivations mentioned?  In any case, whether you are too narrow-minded to see it or too adversarial to admit it, it is indeed an additional motivation for LF to want Tyrion dead.  But, fill your boots, for a second time no less, acting as if this has been presented as the sole or principal motivation for LF to act, it seems you find it satisfying creating a strawman to attack.

    3 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

    This is the conclusion drawn from the actual facts. We could avoid this pointless clutter if you could accept the facts as they are, not how you wished they were.

    This isn't based on actual facts.  This is your conclusion drawn from your interpretation of character motivations, motivations which you have inferred as founded on an unspeakable dread within House Tyrell that they face extermination at Tywin's hands.  No such fear of extermination is borne out in the books and is a wild allegation based on the nascent Tyrell - Lannister competition; in fact it goes beyond that into pure invention.  Expounding on the geography or population density of The Reach doesn't create the dread of such apocalyptic destruction whether you think it should or wish it did.  Sorry, but there it is.

  9. 54 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

    Nothing Lady Olenna says is crystal clear and unambiguous. This is the lady who says she ended her betrothal to Daeron Targaryan, not him; that her husband died because his horse just blithely walked over a cliff; that she thinks Tyrion is going to lead great hosts off to war; that she couldn't say what the stink was at Tyrin's funeral -- and that she is powerless to stop Margaery's wedding because her oaf son has made up in mind but in the next breath says she will not "give him a choice" but to ask leave for Sansa to come to Highgarden. And she isn't even going to bother telling him the real reason for this visit, which is nothing less than to marry his son and heir to a woman of her choice, not his.

    So spare me all this talk about what she was planning to do the day after next. She is an even bigger liar and BSer than Littlefinger.

    There's only so many ways I can say this.  Whether she means it or not she invites Sansa to accompany her.  You are arguing motivation and intent, I am simply pointing out that the meaning of what she says is that Sansa leave with her, a point you seemed determined to refute.

    Accompany means what it means whether you believe what she says or not.

    Can we end #accompanygate now?

    Also, it might help if you addressed the points made by the person you are replying to rather than blurring posters together.  That might spare me all this talk which isn't relevant to what I said.

    1 hour ago, John Suburbs said:

    This is a story about all manner of things, depending on who's perspective you're looking through. And from the Tyrell perspective, the single biggest threat to their safety and security is House Lannister. Hard stop. If it is not about Tyrell vs. Lannister, then why did they kill Joffrey? Just for fun? Why was Margaery seeking to undermine Cersei and gain control of Tommen? Why did they support Renly in the first place and not turn immediately to Tywin and Joffrey?

    You argued that Olenna's motivation was the fear that Tywin would exterminate House Tyrell, a picture you painted in apocalyptic terms.  This isn't borne out by the text.  Sorry.  I'm not interested in arguing with you over your wilder inferences as you have proved you will go on for ever, merely in pointing out that they are not textually accurate.  If you can't accept that, then there's nothing more to say.

    1 hour ago, John Suburbs said:

    Like I said, it's not just that Tywin is unreachable, it's that his death at this time does not change anything. If he dies, a new lord will emerge at Casterly Rock, but the Lannisters will still control the north and all the other realms he has acquired over the past 15 years. Only Tyrion's death right now can make a meaningful dent in this bloc. Tywin can come later, after his fiefdom has been dismantled.

    You said Tywin was unreachable.  I said he was anything but as he was at the same feast as Joffrey.  Like with #accompanygate and "The Rains of Highgarden" you are playing fast and loose with the text.

    1 hour ago, John Suburbs said:

    Every argument I've made is sourced directly from the text. Is the Reach not the most populous zone? Does it not field the largest army, time and time again? Does it have any natural barriers like the other zones do?

    I think you'll find there are three examples above which refute your first point.  Which are what I am talking about specifically.  As to your rhetorical questions, what do they have to do with anything I have said?  

    1 hour ago, John Suburbs said:

    The facts are all on my side. There is nothing that supports any other explanation.

    Said with customary closed-mindedness.  There are plenty of other ideas, stated over the years and in this thread.  If you don't agree with them that's fine but you don't have any particular insight that others lack here, just your own take on things.  Please realise that.

    1 hour ago, John Suburbs said:

    Really? You think that the dagger lie is what motivates Petyr to kill Joffrey now, more than a year later, when everyone and anyone who would care about that is dead? How about the fact that Tyrion is now Master of Coin and is on the verge of unravelling Petyr's massive embezzlement of the crown's gold? Do you think the very real possibility of losing his head would be a stronger motivation?

    I quite clearly said it was an additional motivation.  Additional to the ones that others had mentioned.  If you read what people actually posted instead of wondering how to use it as ammunition in an adversarial sense we could avoid a lot of this pointless clutter.

    1 hour ago, John Suburbs said:

    This is what Lady Olenna fears: the Reach burned to ashes, Highgarden destroyed, her family murdered, even the little babies. Her line extinguished, for all time. This is a far greater motivation to kill Tyrion than Petyr's, who can always split to Braavos and disappear if the worst happens. Lady O will be helpless, unless she takes action now.

    These are the facts, my friend. Sorry.

    This is a wild inference that you now choose to claim as fact.  How silly.

  10. On 2/15/2024 at 5:05 PM, John Suburbs said:

    Like I said, "whilst the men are having their war." Are the men going off to war the day after tomorrow? Not.

    She knows perfectly well that Sansa is leaving that night. Otherwise, there is no reason for her to risk her life, and the lives of her entire family, on this.

    :blink: Look, you can certainly argue that Olenna does not mean what she says but you cannot argue with the meaning of her words.  She says she is leaving the day after tomorrow and suggests Sansa accompany her.  That is crystal clear and unambiguous in meaning.  She provides a cover story for this to allay the suspicions of listening ears, a pretext really, by presenting this as a visit by Sansa while the men are having their war.  Whether she means this or is laying a false trail for listening ears, including Sansa's, is another matter.

    I am fairly certain we can agree on what the word accompany means so hopefully we can put this one to bed.

    On 2/15/2024 at 5:05 PM, John Suburbs said:

    This has every basis in text. This is literally the story itself. Highgarden has been the most powerful house throughout the ages, under both the Gardeners and the Tyrells. They can easily field twice if not three times the army as any other house, and they have the Redwyne navy as well. And the Reach has no geographic features that allow it to protect itself, like the other kingdoms do. Meanwhile, Tywin has extended his hold, through conquest and marriage, past the westerlands to the riverlands, crownlands, stormlands, the Iron Throne itself, and now the north -- well more than half the kingdom. This does give him the ability to outraise the Tyrell forces and neutralize their one and only means of defending themselves. These are the plain basic fact, explicitly spelled out in the text.

    Tywin is unreachable at the moment. Tyrion is vulnerable. And killing Tywin does not change the basic calculus because Casterly Rock would still remain in Lannister hands, as would the north, riverlands, stormlands, crownlands the the Iron Throne. There are no other Lannister cousins to fill Tyrion's shoes because they will have lost Sansa. Without her, they don't have the north.

    So my conclusion is based on the actual facts, not made up ones. Hubris has nothing to do with it.

    Well, no.  ASOIAF works on a number of levels obviously: ice vs fire, Stark vs Lannister, the grand Game of Thrones being the most obvious but this is not a story about Lannisters vs Tyrells.  Mace gets to play Warwick Kingmaker in tWot5K and extracts significant rewards from the Crown: Margaery to be Queen, Mace himself on The Small Council, Loras in The Kingsguard, the huge land and power grab with the attainder of the Florents and Brightwater Keep passing to the Tyrells.  They are reaching "overmighty" status and Tywin reinstates Pycelle to prevent the Citadel naming another Tyrell to the Small Council.

    The Tyrells are on the up and they may overreach - the ploy for WF makes little practical sense for either Lannisters or Tyrells given it's distant location and the Northern Lords' history of loyalty to the Starks but there it is - but they are most assuredly not in bits about Tywin annihilating their House.  There is no textual support for this and no basis to claim they fear becoming the next version of "The Rains of Castamere".  You may feel there is a plausible reason to feel the Tyrells are wary of Tywin and wish to prevent Winterfell passing to the Lannisters - and to secure it themselves (this is all fairly straightforward power politics after all) - but the fear of extermination is not at all supported by the text.  Mance is trying to save his people, Olenna?  Nah, she's protecting Margaery and/or advancing her House's interests.

    Tywin is not unreachable either.  He is at the same feast his grandson was poisoned, very probably by a Tyrell, and he is later murdered in The Red Keep with a crossbow.  There's even a theory that Oberyn had managed to poison him thought I don't subscribe to that.

    I feel like you made an argument here that relies on making wild inferences about character motivations that are not supported by the text rather than reached a conclusion based on actual facts.  Sorry.

    On 2/15/2024 at 5:38 PM, Frey family reunion said:

    And no, Olenna's reasons for killing Tyrion aren't stronger than Petyr's.  That's complete hogwash.  Olenna's only motivation in killing Tyrion is to free up Sansa for Willas.  Petyr has his own grandiose plans for an unmarried Sansa, but he also has a very personal motivation for killing Tyrion for when Tyrion played him for a fool in ACOK.  And Petyr was also most probably responsible for Tyrion's attempted murder at the Battle of the Blackwater.

    Since AGOT, Tyrion has known that LF lied about him owning the catspaw's dagger, a lie that put Tyrion in mortal jeopardy with the catnapping and Lysa's version of justice at The Eyrie.  Since Tyrion survived and questioned him over it LF has every reason to expect that Tyrion will eventually get round to undermining him or offing him as payback so we can infer self-preservation as an additional motive for LF.

  11. 23 hours ago, Frey family reunion said:

    Except that who is going to set aside her marriage to Tyrion for her?  Certainly not the King, whether it be Joffrey or Tommen.  The Lannisters control the kingdom and they don't want to give up Sansa.  So they aren't going to allow the marriage to be annulled, certainly not so Sansa could marry Willas.  And of course at some point the marriage may get consummated.  The Lannisters sure were pushing hard for it.  If push came to shove, Sansa couldn't refuse Tyrion.  

    So her only way out is to go through with a plan whereby it looks like Tyrion chokes to death on a morsel of food, and Sansa scoots out of King's Landing, hopefully to either the North or Highgarden where she'll be free to remarry.

    If Tyrion is framed for regicide she'll be free of the marriage quick enough.  But above all Sansa wants to escape and ending the marriage to Tyrion isn't nearly as important as her subsequent Vale chapters show.

    22 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

    No, she doesn't say We are leaving, she says I am leaving.

    She knows perfectly well that the men are not going to be off to war the day after tomorrow, just as she knows that Tyrion is not going to lead a host. So Olenna is not lying. She does want Sansa to come visit Highgarden, at some point, when the time is right and the coast is clear.

    23 hours ago, John Suburbs said:
    Quote

    "I am pleased to say that I will be leaving for Highgarden day after next. I have had quite enough of this smelly city, thank you. Perhaps you would like to accompany me for a little visit, whilst the men are off having their war."

    She says "Perhaps you would like to accompany me".  That quite literally means to go with her.  It's an odd thing to try and turn into meaning something different like traveling there on her own in a few months time.

    23 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

    Her only motivation is not to wed Sansa to Willas. Her motivation is to preserve her house, her realm and her people from the mad dog tyrant who grinds rival houses into the dirt even after he professes his loyalty to them. Look at his record: Reynes, Tarbecks, Targaryens, Starks, Tullys, Darrys,  . . .  This is what she fears: the Reach burned to ashes, tens of thousands of smallfolk slaughtered and left rotting in the mud, Highgarden razed to the ground, her entire family, even the little children, murdered in cold blood, her line extinguished, forever. Only killing Tyrion can turn the tide on Tywin's relentless march to complete domination over the Reach.

    What?  This is a fantastical invention that has no basis in the text.  Indeed the Tyrells have the upper hand over the Lannisters and Mace could basically name his price for supporting them.  But if you really believe it then you should believe that Olenna wanted to kill Tywin, the monstrous world-ending danger you claim she fears so much: there are plenty more Lannister cousins to fill Tyrion's shoes after all.

    23 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

    Sorry, but the only way any of this works out is if 

    Sorry, you've got it all backward.

    It does matter because it blows your whole rationale for Petyr's actions out of the water.

    22 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

    That's absurd.

    Do you honestly think Lady Olenna is that great a fool as to take that chance? If so, I have a lovely manse in old Valyria I would dearly love to sell you.

    Sorry, but this is utter nonsense.

    Nope, sorry.

    Dude, everyone has ideas about this, please try and have a little more humility about your own.

    14 hours ago, Aebram said:

    I just had another thought about this.  I'm honestly not sure if I believe it myself, but it seemed worth posting. It's a continuation of my earlier comment about repressed memories, and whether characters can be unreliable in their own POV, which said in part:

     If one character can repress memories, so can another ... What if it was Tyrion, not Sansa, who poisoned Joffrey?

    Tyrion doesn't have a history of repressed memories despite some very unpleasant ones so there's no apparent base to build from (like the unkiss, minor though it is).  He is our POV at the wedding and although drunk we do have his thoughts on leaving before Joffrey gets any nastier so it's hard to marry that up with a pre-conceived plan to off Joffrey.  And the hairnet I feel surely has a purpose other than as a writer's ploy to wrongfoot the readers and characters.

    The poisoning is a crime looking for a criminal and as Oberyn tells Tyrion afterwards he thought he could have been accused himself.  I think we can take Tyrion's confusion, then and in later povs, at face value.

  12. 4 hours ago, Moiraine Sedai said:

    It’s a fair description of what happened. 

    If you bother to read the books Catelyn has a ringside view to the slaughter of the Northern and River Lords at The Red Wedding, the tipping moment being when her son is murdered in front of her eyes, so to describe it as some kind of Aegon for Catelyn tit for tat with the score even is pure stupidity.  And very poor trolling.

    But you know that of course.

  13. @Frey family reunion Good stuff, I enjoyed this and a lot of thought and effort went into it :cheers:

    In general I think what Sansa knows or suspects and what she suppresses could be explored a bit more - for a while I thought you might be going full "Sansa Durden" but her concealed memory seems quite specific and limited.  The hairnet symbolises home but no thought of how it is to deliver home or what magic is in the black amethysts appears in the text before Sansa's post facto realisation that there was poison in at least one of the stones but if she is to take Oleanna's cue she must be in the know or have figured it out.  Otherwise this is the only planned murder when the murderer doesn't know until the last moment that they are supposed to carry it out (rather than flee in the confusion afterwards) or how they are supposed to do so.

    I have to say I have always been happy with the surface story that Oleanna took the smuggled poison from her hairnet and either she or one of the Tyrells slipped it into the chalice but ever since you referenced Sansa watching Joffrey and fiddling with her hair in a previous thread I have been open to the idea that she may have decided to try and poison Joffrey.  This ofc requires her to understand she carries poison in her hairnet, raises the possibility that both she and Oleanna are looking for opportunities to poison Joffrey (or Tyrion for argument's sake) and leaned on my faulty transposition of Joffrey threatening to get a child on Sansa from her wedding to Tyrion to Joffrey's wedding to Margaery, an extremely sharp spur to action.  The realisation of what happened to Ice and what may happen to her if she does not escape does give a spur to action but Joffrey seems the greater threat and who "justice for your father, vengeance" would be targeted at rather than Tyrion.  How not when she begged Joffrey for mercy for her father and he gave her his twisted idea of "justice" instead?

    For Sansa has every reason to want Joffrey dead.  He executed her father in front of her despite her pleas, bullied and humiliated her during their betrothal and even though she is married to his uncle he threatens to sleep with her whenever he wants.  She is not free of him and he is as much a danger to her as Oleanna perceives Joffrey to be to Margaery.  Tyrion, in contrast, tells her he won't touch her until she wants him to and has been as good as his word.  Would she like to be free of him and of all Lannisters?  Absolutely, yes, it's why "Come to the Godswood if you want to go home" is electrifying for her but Joffrey is the larger danger and when Lysa questions her on why Tyrion never slept with her she thinks "Because he was kind".  When Dontos first gives Sansa the hairnet he tells her it's justice for her father, vengeance and home: thematically the intended target is surely Joffrey not Tyrion.

    The problems of trying to get a coherent picture of what really happened at the purple wedding are significant and there have been many threads and discussions on distance to object, motive, the properties of the strangler, sublimation and a pie vs chalice debate that although very sharp reminds me of The Life of Brian's Gourd and Sandal factions.  Tyrion is our only pov but he is unaware of what is afoot and draws our attention to the chalice; Sansa is present but affects confusion and then a horrified realisation in her pov afterwards where Dontos appears to draw our attention to the pie; LF offers a clear explanation later of what happened and why but he is the most manipulative liar in the whole story; Oleanna is not a pov and we have no reliable way of determining her actions or intentions.  For me it's quite plausible that Oleanna and LF are lying to and using each other: Oleanna pretends to want to kill Tyrion to gain LF's questionable alliance in the scheme while aiming for Joffrey.

    Beyond that we have GRRM stating that the way he resolves mysteries may be less satisfying to the readership than what they theorise may be the answer - who sent the catspaw to murder Bran springs to mind.  That seems a strong possibility here and it is exacerbated by the problems of how the strangler was delivered and how opaque individual's motives and how reliable their memories and stated intentions are.

    Sansa tells herself to be brave on the morning of the wedding but this can simply be mustering resolve to escape, itself dangerous and daunting for a 13/14 year old girl not used to taking risks and this is a very big risk: if it fails and she is caught she will suffer repercussions and will be more closely watched in future.  Her terror after the wedding when she realises one of the amethysts is missing is genuine (unless we posit a repressed memory) and she seems to realise for the first time it was poison.  If she was the poisoner there seems missed opportunity for her character development or conflict between her Alayne persona and Sansa though you could argue that may emerge later.  But if the target was Tyrion why is Dontos so unconcerned that Joffrey has been poisoned instead, regicide being a far, far more dangerous proposition than the murder of a dwarf very low in standing with the king?; indeed Dontos is positively crowing at how well everything has gone.

    And yet she is told the hairnet has a purpose at the very beginning, however much she concentrates solely on home of it's three promised purposes (and home ironically is the only one of the three that is a lie), Oleanna may not just be wittering away to her while she retrieves (or notifies her of) the poison, Sansa does fiddle with her hair at a convenient moment, she is at the table and close to both chalice and pie and has reason to want both Tyrion and Joffrey dead.

    Honestly I still think the Tyrells as poisoners is most likely but I think there is the potential to see different motives, different poisoners and different targets - perhaps more than one scheme, or Sansa acting off plan, happening at the same time to add to the difficulty in getting a definitive edition of events - and there are some hints that raise questions about what Sansa knew or did.

    Well done :cheers:

  14. On 2/10/2024 at 2:45 PM, The Commentator said:

    The Tullys and the Starks were known rebels. Criminals. 

    How were the Tullys known rebels?

    Tywin sent Gregor, banners and colours masked, to raid the Riverlands and Ned sent Beric in Robert's name to apprehend him.  Tywin mustered forces at The Golden Tooth and launched a campaign against Riverrun without any basis to do so: Tyrion was a prisoner held at The Eyrie in The Vale of Arryn.

    Seems like the Tullys were illegally attacked twice.

    And if the Tullys and Starks were known rebel and criminals, what does that say about Walder Frey for entering into a marriage alliance (both Robb and Arya), when he could have remained buttoned up in his impregnable fortress?

  15. 1 minute ago, Melifeather said:

    Posting an alternative theory that hinges upon Sansa suppressing her memories is a big hurdle to get over and very difficult to be convincing. It leaves allot of unanswered questions. 

    That may be your idea on how this all works, but it's not mine. If you aren't ready to have your essay critiqued then it's not ready to publish. If you post segments then you should expect comments. 

    Sansa suppressing her memories is the subject of the promised part 4.  That's all I'm trying to get across.  But as we're close to arguing over nothing I'll leave off.

  16. 21 hours ago, Moiraine Sedai said:

    Cat would have stayed dead. The dead should stay dead. Cat killed Aegon Frey and they killed her for it. It was even. She then comes back and starts killing more. Her sins increase and so does her punishment. It should be the same for Arya.  

    :D This kind of summary of The Red Wedding probably earns a lot of likes in the Trollverse, right?

  17. 22 hours ago, Melifeather said:

    What kind of hint are you understanding here? Dontos said the hairnet represented justice and vengeance for her father. Joffrey beheaded her father not Tyrion. If you were Sansa and you understood that you had the power to take the life of Joffrey, who tortured you and beheaded your father, or Tyrion simply because he's ugly and you were forced to marry him? I can't believe anyone would seriously consider Tyrion over Joffrey! 

    What do you think Sansa understood when Ser Dontos told her the hairnet represented "home"? Where did she think Dontos was taking her when she slipped away from the wedding feast? Doesn't it make sense that she assumed he would help her get home to Winterfell?

     

    Sansa repeats the note as if a mantra, "come to the godswood if you want to go home". At that time she believed Arya was safe back at Winterfell, dancing and sewing, and playing with Bran and Rickon.

     

    I think it's quite clear that Sansa wished to go home to Winterfell and that King Joffrey had the power to keep her in Kings Landing. In Storm she tells Ser Dontos that he needn't help her escape any longer, because she's going to marry Willas Tyrell. Sansa was willing to accept a marriage to Willas rather than go home to Winterfell, because he offered her a life miles away from JOFFREY!

    Dontos tells her to beware of the Tyrells as they only want power over Winterfell through her. Dontos informs Littlefinger of the Tyrell plot and Littlefinger makes sure Tywin hears of it and that is when the plan to marry her to Tyrion is formed. 

    Even after Sansa is married to Tyrion, Joffrey tells her that she will be his mistress:

    Until that moment, Sansa believed Tyrion would protect her from Joffrey. She was already married to Tyrion at that point, but this dance with Joffrey shook her. Now she understood that being married to Tyrion kept her too close to Joffrey. Sansa was terrified of Joffrey. She wasn't afraid of Tyrion. Killing Tyrion would end her marriage, but it wouldn't keep her safe from Joffrey.

     

    It's not my theory :rolleyes:  You are making a lot of assumptions and asking a lot of questions.  As before I suggest you wait for the OP to finish rather than asking him (or me) a lot of questions he may intend to address.

    All I was addressing was the idea that the hairnet symbolised nothing but home to Sansa.  It's not my intention to do anything with that point as it's not my thread.  I suppose I couldn't contain my enthusiasm to comment either.

    1 hour ago, Melifeather said:

    This is what this forum is for...to present a theory and see if it can hold up to scrutiny. An OP's biggest hope is that their theory generates allot of discussion as this one has. My congratulations to @Frey family reunion for his success! We're not trying to tear FFR down, but to engage in a fruitful debate which hopefully leads to additional insight and understanding.

    Of course it is.  But the theory is one argument broken into four posts due to length and every post gives the OP a distraction to field before he has finished presenting the theory (still unfinished).  It might have been better to post it in one go and then let the discussion flow but I was hoping we could contain our enthusiasm to discuss it until we had read and digested all of it.

  18. 19 hours ago, Melifeather said:

    @Frey family reunion will you address "when" Sansa got the idea to use the hairnet on Tyrion? All she knew prior to the wedding feast was that Ser Dontos was bringing her a magic hairnet that would take her home.

    There's a hint though:

    A Clash of Kings - Sansa VIII

    It was a hair net of fine-spun silver, the strands so thin and delicate the net seemed to weigh no more than a breath of air when Sansa took it in her fingers. Small gems were set wherever two strands crossed, so dark they drank the moonlight. "What stones are these?"
    "Black amethysts from Asshai. The rarest kind, a deep true purple by daylight."
    "It's very lovely," Sansa said, thinking, It is a ship I need, not a net for my hair.
    "Lovelier than you know, sweet child. It's magic, you see. It's justice you hold. It's vengeance for your father." Dontos leaned close and kissed her again. "It's home."
     
    Home = Escape.  But justice and, in particular, vengeance suggests more than escape.  Plus we have to wonder how Sansa imagines a hairnet will help her get any of home, justice or vengeance.  The OP has a view of Sansa as unreliable narrator and repressing memories / thoughts(?) to share in Part 4.
  19. 7 hours ago, LynnS said:

    @Frey family reunion  How would Olenna or Sansa know which crystal in the hairnet was the strangler?  Assuming that there was only one and you can't tell the difference between the poison crystal and amethyst?

    TBF that's always been a problem with how GRRM set up the hairnet rather than any theory about the poisoner - it makes for great drama but isn't very practical.  I'm reluctant to think the whole hairnet was a treasure trove of poison given how rare and expensive I assume The Strangler to be (and the problem of Sansa being present for hours at the wedding and feast with all that poison on display for Oberyn / Pycelle / AN Other to spot). 

  20. 20 minutes ago, Aejohn the Conqueroo said:

    'Look at me, the king who eats leftovers.'  It just wouldn't fly. There's more at stake than Robert's personal wishes and if no one else did, at least Jon Arryn still had his eye on the prize. The fact that Robert made himself look ridiculous by the time the boar got him doesn't mean that he set out to look ridiculous or set out willing to be seen as ridiculous. Honestly, I think he'd be more likely to Victarion her than marry her, but again, the people around him would have saved him from that bad choice.

    If he did marry Lyanna, he would have to wait a good long time to have a child with her, so moon tea every morning for a year or so. Half the kingdom would be laughing at the usurper who put his enemy's son on the throne if there was even the hint that their kid could have been Rhaegar's.  it's all too messy. Lyanna would have to be disqualified. 

     

    Well, you can think what you want but "it just wouldn't fly" is conjecture.  There is indeed more at stake than Robert's personal wishes as I pointed out (and others have) in terms of the marriage alliance binding the North to Robert's regime more effectively.

    As to the bolded, this again ignores the OP (the opening statement is literally "Lets imagine that it really was a kidnapping" - at least I hope you're overlooking it) as well as the fact (pointed out in this thread as well) that the first thing Robert did on reaching WF, fifteen years after her death, was visit Lyanna's resting place in the crypts.  This is not to mention the obvious problem of Ned and Robert's relationship coming crashing down with Robert's murder of his sister and the dubious prospect of the Stark-Tully-Arryns, all joined by marriage, deciding to back the Barratheons after this.

    Jeyne Westerling is to be barred from marrying for a year or more iirc, but she is not barred from marrying.  Robert would indeed be prudent (or well-advised) to wait a year before marrying Lyanna.

    But there's no meaningful discussion to be had here if we are talking about different circumstances.

  21. 23 hours ago, Aejohn the Conqueroo said:

    Missed that part. Thanks

    Still don't think he'd do it.

    Robert is rash and temperamental and wants to get his way.  I think there's a good chance he would because he wanted to. 

    The political considerations are strengthening the alliance between the Stark-Barratheon-Arryn-Tully families that are the bedrock of The Robellion and that Robert returns to fifteen years later with the proposed marriage of Joffrey and Sansa.  He's indebted to the Lannisters who are power-hungry (and ultimately depose him of course) so I think it would have been better for him to have had genuine Stark support for his rule rather than Ned disappearing off to WF for good. 

    He would have been guided more by emotion than calculation but I think the latter provides support for his instinctive wish.

    Love and marriage would not have changed his nature, though, as Lyanna correctly pointed out to Ned, so it is highly likely they would have become disillusioned with each other and he would have had many mistresses.  But in a world where arranged marriages are the norm rather than love matches it's more likely he and Lyanna would have had several children and found contentment in their own pursuits rather than each other (more like Stannis and Selyse, even Doran and Mellario).  Lyanna =/= Cersei so I don't see it going wrong so spectacularly.

  22. Bit late but in no particular order:

    Lemongate or in general Dany =/= daughter of Aerys and Rhaella

    Bloodraven =/= the three-eyed crow who is really Old Nan

    Euron = Daario

    Howland Reed = The High Septon

    Qhorin Halfhand = Gerold Hightower

    Mance Raydar = Rhaegar or Arthur Dayne

    Jojenpaste

    Time-traveling Bran

    Bloodraven as Master of the Universe or at least master manipulator behind events

    There's an ice dragon buried under WF

×
×
  • Create New...