Jump to content

the trees have eyes

Members
  • Posts

    2,165
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by the trees have eyes

  1. 11 minutes ago, Mourning Star said:

    He does not come to the conclusion independently.

    Jaime comes to the conclusion that Joffrey hired the catspaw.  Tyrion comes to this conclusion too.  They reach these conclusions independent of each other, i.e. without conferring.

    I thought my meaning was clear.  Hopefully this helps.

  2. On 1/25/2023 at 1:44 PM, Jekse said:

    The last time Joffrey tried to impress his dad by killing something (the kitten) he was beaten, so he would not care to appease Robert. Supplying a cat's paw with a dagger is asanine, the dude got sent to get deal with a crippled child, his hands would have served well enough. Also Tyrion is drunk when he deduces this, and our POV characters rarely figure out a mystery correctly, they are almost always wrong. 

    Don't forget Jaime comes to the same conclusion independently.  It's to reinforce Tyrion's realisation.

    A Storm of Swords - Jaime IX

    Robert? Jaime had guarded the king long enough to know that Robert Baratheon said things in his cups that he would have denied angrily the next day. "Were you alone when Robert said this?"
    "You don't think he said it to Ned Stark, I hope? Of course we were alone. Us and the children." Cersei removed her hairnet and draped it over a bedpost, then shook out her golden curls.  "Perhaps Myrcella sent this man with the dagger, do you think so?"
    It was meant as mockery, but she'd cut right to the heart of it, Jaime saw at once. "Not Myrcella. Joffrey."

    If the assassin left no dagger there would be no clue to follow or for LF to lie to Cat about setting up the whole catnapping.  It's the author who intends the dagger to be found as he intends the assassination to fail to set the storyline of AGOT in motion.

  3. 8 hours ago, Mourning Star said:

    It is only in deference to privileged information that this mystery is considered solved.

    In your opinion.  Many people find the text quite clear.  The reason the "privileged information" is quoted is to show the conspiracists what GRRM told people in advance he would do.  If you're still not happy then, sure,

    8 hours ago, Mourning Star said:

    we may as well enjoy our speculations!

    Go right ahead.  But "while you wait" I have to warn you you are doing yourself a disservice B)

  4. 8 hours ago, Aebram said:

    On your first question:  As I pointed out in a recent post, there is evidence for both the Mance and Cersei theories in various chapters of ASOS.

    On your second question:  We didn't need a character POV to tell us that the old black tomcat in the Red Keep is actually the former pet of Princess Rhaenys. And we didn't need a character POV to tell us that some members of House Frey ended up on the menu at Ramsay's wedding feast. Half the fun of reading these books is finding and solving these hidden mysteries, where you can't even look for the answer until you notice that there's a question.

    The text may be"pointing to" Joffrey, but we know that the Martin sometimes makes use of unreliable witnesses that give us false leads.  The characters who suspect Joffrey are just guessing; they don't have any hard evidence. And I still have trouble believing that any 12-year old boy, even a prince, could arrange to have arson and murder committed in the home of the Warden of the North.

    He didn't plan it, he just hired someone, that's pretty easy to do, no master plan required.  The arson was simply the assassin's idea to draw the guards away.  Joff is not a pleasant character, that's pretty clear.  What part of his conduct in AGOT, ACOK and ASOS makes you think he would baulk at ordering someone killed?

    Unfortunately I feel you won't ever be satisfied because I think you just don't like what the author wrote.  You try very hard to find reasons to reject both what is presented in text as the solution and the response the author gave to several readers at the time who were asking about the mystery and telling them when he would resolve it.  For the vast majority of people this was a puzzle that was solved over 20 years ago and you have both in book and out of book confirmation of this.

    We all come from different places in reading and assessing the text and a lot of people who are bemused by you flogging this dead horse read this story and had this mystery resolved over 20 years ago.  GRRM's point about how people would come up with ideas they liked more than what he wrote is bang on the money here and it seems some people just can't let go.  Please don't take this too critically but I feel you show the place you are coming from and your (un)conscious motivation here:

    On 1/7/2023 at 1:48 AM, Aebram said:

    Jacobs'  video is impressively thorough.  It covers, in great detail, all the ground that Mourning Star and I did ... in 2017. (*sigh*) It seems that all the good theories are taken ... 

    I understand that ASOIAF is rich in detail and plot twists and mysteries and that people gain a great deal of enjoyment in theory-crafting and looking for hidden elements.  But the wish to find a killer theory, inspired perhaps by the example of a content creator, might skew your reading.  Everyone is partial to their own creations and theories on this forum are often defended with a parent's tenacity but this whole thing was tied up long ago.  It may be new and fresh for you and it must be annoying to have people tell you it's done and dusted when you are just beginning to explore it but please look at it the other way round: some of us really don't get why this is being unearthed after so long.  Mance was not fleshed out by the author until after he had closed this out.  It might look like you can project things on to Mance but this is projection not the author's intent.

    I don't know if GRRM still answers readers' questions but I think the only way for you to get the comfort you want is to ask him directly rather than asking for someone to provide you with a "watertight" quote.  Then again I don't know how he would feel about being asked over 20 years on to confirm something he already has but in a specific form of words given to him by you so you couldn't dismiss his answer as evasive.

     

  5. 1 hour ago, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:

     

    The children of the house do not need to suffer.  Big Walder, little Cersei, Elmar, and Olvar will build the strong foundation of the Frey future.  I don't want Lord Walder to die.  I think Daenerys on the throne is the best hope of a just judgment for the House of Frey.  The Twins, bridge, and lands need to remain with the Freys because they know how to operate the business.  I am biased but those are my wishes for the Freys.  It is the Starks who more deserved to lose their titles because of their penchant for rebellions. 

    I feel that taxing trade across the only bridge over a river for hundreds of miles is not a specialist business skill or an operation that only the Freys could manage.

    The Freys are married into multiple Riverland Houses and many in the Westerlands and elsewhere, how not when Walder had dozens of children, grand- and great-grandchildren?  The spouses and children of these unions will suffer no consequences but the Freys will be disinherited and the adult males involved in The Red Wedding will face capital punishment, either formally or in revenge killings (BwB, Manderly, GreatJon Umber, etc, etc).

    Like the Boltons it's hard to see how they would ever be trusted again and Houses do fail or fall: Gardener, Whent, Durrandon and so on.

  6. 10 hours ago, Aebram said:

    So I think that the other theories still have merit ... unless you know something that the rest of us don't? Has George ever explicitly said or written that Joffrey is the culprit?

    Can I ask you to look at it the other way: what in anything in ASOS makes it look like GRRM is revealing either Mance or Cersei as the culprit? 

    It's clear that he is pointing to Joffrey but he uses character povs not an omniscient narrator so how could he point to Joffrey except through other character povs?

  7. On 12/22/2022 at 4:28 PM, John Suburbs said:

    So you are not giving him credit. You are turning him into a hack.

    Because I don't support your pet theory pulled out of thin air? :rolleyes:  It's a silly accusation to make to someone who doesn't agree with your unestablished musings.  The Trouble on The Trident is one of the key scenes in the development of AGOT and it's a pity that you try and replace it with your own version.  It's pretty slippery to try and position yourself as the author's champion and defender while doing this so that any criticism of you is presented as rejection or undermining of GRRM.  That's sly and the problem of course is your theory not GRRM's story.

    On 12/22/2022 at 4:28 PM, John Suburbs said:

    Ned had already sent the bulk of his men with Beric, and no, he would have no idea that either of his daughters, let alone the good one, would go sneaking off to the queen to tell her his plans. Nothing unusual there -- other than the fact that even Sansa is surprised at her newfound willfulness, which may also be a subtle sign of things happening in the subtext.

    Don't hand wave this away.  Ned wants to get his children out of KL so they are safe and he fully understands the danger they are in yet he posts no guards.  On The Trident when there is no appreciable danger he allows both his daughters to go off without guards yet at KL you say Nothing unusual there when they are in grave danger.  For Arya on The Trident you don't bat an eye-lid.  You can't have it both ways.  Either they should be surrounded by guards at all times or the author presents situations in which they are not to allow the story to flow and to write scenes he wants - Bran's "fall", Sansa's "betrayal", Syrio's sacrifice and of course, The Trouble on The Trident.

    On 12/22/2022 at 4:28 PM, John Suburbs said:

    So none of what you are proposing as evidence is even closely the same as this.

    The "evidence" I am proposing is simply how the author writes his scenes and how he puts children in positions without any adult supervision.  The only reason you consider this particular scene any different is your own internal dislike of some of the author's decisions leading to an alternate theory.

    On 12/22/2022 at 4:28 PM, John Suburbs said:

    unlike two of the most valuable children in the world riding off alone into the countryside.

    Is this meant to be your clinching argument?

    Is it really so hard to see that there is not expected to be any danger and Joffrey is arrogant enough to dismiss Sandor and to try and impress Sansa out of ego?  If he really intended to kill her why did he get drunk or approach people who might be witnesses rather than trying to avoid them as Sansa asked him to?

    Look at it without your theory-tinted goggles on  What if Joffrey is captured by outlaws who demand a king's ransom?  He and Cersei look pretty stupid then, don't they?  So much for the master plan.

  8. 18 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

    Nonsense. It's all subtextual evidence that there was a plot afoot

    It's really straightforward and "evidence" of nothing that you're pushing.  GRRM needs Sansa and Joffrey to encounter Arya and Mycah far enough away from any adult supervision for the scene he wants to show to play out how he wants.

    I'm bemused anyone could complicate this.

    18 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

    Give Martin a little credit. When he uses "authorial devices" to advance the plot, he at least makes them plausible.

    Oh, I give him tons of credit, I'm a big fan.  It's the implausible conspiracy theorists and fantasists who leave me bemused.  Authorial devices to advance the plot?  It's what writing is!!!!

    So Bran happens to be an agile climber, despite being seven (?) and just happens to come upon Jaime and Cersei in a  compromising position in a pretty much abandoned part of the castle and just happens to be stood in an open window five stories up for Jaime to push him with no one around to see?

    Ned, despite knowing of the danger he and his family are in (and planning to get his daughters away from KL) nonetheless puts no guards around them?  It's to allow Sansa to sneak out and get kidnapped and Syrio to buy time for Arya's escape and GRRM the opportunity to showcase Syrio's heroic sacrifice.

    Or Tyrion happens to blunder into The Inn at The Crossroads with only one servant allowing Catelyn to kidnap him?

    Or Arya briefly leaving The Hollow Hill only to run straight into Sandor and get kidnapped by him?

    GRRM shows the scenes he wants to and develops the story the way he has chosen and that requires putting individuals in precarious or isolated positions.  It's simply how writing works, I really don't see what is so hard to follow here.  What is less plausible about Joffrey and Sansa going riding than any of these other examples?  What is implausible about Joffrey and Sansa going riding at all?  He simply wants them to encounter Arya and Mycah in isolation.

    Plausible to you, now?  Well, that's up to you.  How does it go: "Die on this hill, if you want"? :D

    18 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

    If he just made up whatever scenario out of thin air whenever he wanted, it wouldn't take him 10 years to write a novel.

    Say what?   You must have noticed that AGOT, ACOK and ASOS did not take ten years to write....  It's precisely because he didn't waste any time with elaborate and extravagant plot points to get Bran alone with Jaime and Cersei, or Arya and Sansa unguarded in The Red Keep, or Bran and Catelyn alone with an assassin that provokes the conspiracy theorists into picking holes in it and positing double bluffs or elaborate alternatives. 

    And it's breath-taking that you wave away his lead in to The Trouble on the Trident incident by dismissing this as a scenario  made up out of thin air when this is exactly what you are doing in your counter-argument!  That's truly remarkable.

  9. 6 hours ago, Mourning Star said:

    I don't know what you are talking about, Littlefinger wasn't even in Winterfell to know that Bran had "fallen", let alone plot an assassination attempt.

    I am talking about how one or two people push the idea that LF was behind the attempt to kill Bran.  I quite agree with you on this point as it happens.  I'm just equally sceptical of the textually unsupported idea that Mance was behind it.  It's as much a reader substitution as LF for the culprit revealed by the author, namely Joffrey.

    6 hours ago, Mourning Star said:

    However, the only reason to send the king's unique dagger to kill a cripple in bed (when a pillow would do) is if it was meant to be found after the deed was done.

    Not at all.  If the assassin succeeded it would never be found.  And finding it doesn't point to anyone on it's own, it just makes it clear that someone took it from the king's armoury.  When would anyone notice it was gone and if the assassin was successful who could possibly join up the dots months later?  Only Catelyn's meltdown and refusal to leave Bran's side for any reason and the intervention of a direwolf save Bran, neither of which could be foreseen by the assassin.  We see his surprise in story.  You only discount this as it doesn't fit your theory and need to argue that the blade was meant to be found.  There is no reason to suppose it was.

    6 hours ago, Mourning Star said:

    I do think causing strife was a clear goal of the catspaw attempt on Bran's life.

    Like the guy who claims Joffrey meant to kill Sansa on The Trident you are overlooking the fact that the assassin and the dagger are an authorial device to move the story forward by launching Catelyn off to KL to warn Ned that Bran's fall was not an accident and that the Lannisters are trying to kill him because he must know something damaging to them.  It's part of upping the ante in the Stark-Lannister conflict and pivotal in the drift to war.

    The dagger was not meant to be found or the assassination fail by the person behind it but both were by the author to drive the story forward.  It's tradecraft.  Some people find this clumsy or unsatisfactory and look for alternatives but the author said he'd wrap up the mystery in ASOS and he did so why are we here?

    Mance?  He's not even a character in AGOT.

    6 hours ago, Mourning Star said:

    At the end of the day you can handwave anything away as just being how it was written and having no meaning, but I think you are doing yourself a disservice.

    Just do not say you were not warned.

    Well that's me warned for my disservice to myself :rolleyes:

    What is it about people with pet theories and their need to tell other people that until they drink the kool-aid they are missing out on the "truth".  I'll file your warning with those about Dany not being a Targaryen, Old Nan being the three-eyed crow, the poison being in the pie, Howland Reed being The High Septon and more than I wish to recount.

    You have a particular interpretation that is not well-supported in the text or by the author's own interview comments on the matter and you're attached to it because it's your thing so you're welcome to it but you won't find many people to agree with you.  Some, sure, but not many.  So enjoy your head cannon but don't be surprised if other people don't agree.  And it's better to keep warnings and ruminations on handwaving and disservice to yourself, they don't add anything to a post other than pique.

  10. 8 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

    No that's not it. It's the fact that they were allowed to go off all by themselves in the first place.

    This is your smoking gun?  The reason they are unaccompanied is an authorial device so the Joffrey - Arya conflict can happen without adult witnesses or intervention.

    8 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

    And, of course, we first learn that Sansa hates horses and has very little experience at riding, but there she is bouncing overland on her common mare while Joff tears ahead on his courser, which is a horse bred for speed. And what do we later learn Cersei believes happens to young girl's bodies when they go in for hard riding?

    There's more, but this was a setup, clear as day.

    Joffrey is just showing off and Sansa is attempting to please him by going despite not liking riding.  They have to go riding otherwise they are in camp surrounded by adults and, as GRRM is pointing them at Arya and Mycah practicing swordplay far enough from camp to avoid notice, that encounter can't happen at all if they don't ride out and can't happen the way he wants if they are accompanied by guards (Ned's for Sansa, Robert's or The Hound for Joffrey).  This is all pretty obvious.

    Clear as day a set-up?  Yes, but for Joffrey and Arya to cause trouble on The Trident.  For Joffrey to kill Sansa?  Good lord, no.

    4 hours ago, Aebram said:

    I've already shown that it's not sound.

    Not dramatic enough or even particularly satisfying?  I can see why people don't like it for those reasons but that's no reason to dismiss what we're presented with.

    4 hours ago, Aebram said:

    Regarding your final question about relevance, I will suggest that the murder of John Arryn had no relevance by the time GRRM revealed it.

    Depends what you mean by relevant.  It revealed how long LF had been plotting and how long Lysa had been his accomplice.  It also got her killed when she divulged his secret which gives Sansa an axe over his head should she ever be in a position to use it.  And it shows us how ruthless and cynical he is.  Pretty relevant imo.

    4 hours ago, Aebram said:

    So it seems reasonable to think that he may do the same for Joffrey.  Perhaps the truth will come out during Cersei's trial, if she did indeed do it.

    But he already has. 

    And Cersei?  She gave Jaime grief for throwing Bran out the window when she planned to simply frighten him into silence.  She has been a pov character and revealed her childhood murder of Melara Hetherspoon.  We've had retrospectives from her pov to inform us about her character even in youth.  There's no reason not for her to have reflected on trying to kill Bran and no story impact from her having tried to do so.

    4 hours ago, Mourning Star said:

    Mance Rayder is (presumably) alive and in Winterfell.

    What was Mance digging for in the Frostfangs? Did he find it? Is there a connection to the rare old information that burned, or was stolen from, Winterfell's Library?

    How would the knowledge that Mance tried to have Bran killed impact his relationship with Jon?

    What game are you playing, priestess? Did you have some other task for Mance?

    This just replaces LF with Mance as the master of chaos.  I leave that to Preston Jacobs.

    Mance was digging for The Horn of Joramun to bring The Wall down if needed.  The fire in the library tower was just a distraction to pull the guards from Bran's room.

    I imagine it would impact his already complicated relationship quite severely but you could pull any name out of a hat and say the same thing.  I don't take Mance for a child killer but why advertise to Jon that he had been to WF when the royal party was there if he was behind the plot to kill Bran? That's LF style boasting/taunting of someone who you wronged but is ignorant of it (Ned).  That doesn't feel like Mance.

    As with all these alternative theories, we are talking about an event early in Book One that the author said would be addressed in Book Three and was.  Some people don't like how it was addressed but it is what he planned and wrote.

  11. 7 hours ago, Aebram said:

    I don't think we can assume that this one will go unsolved

    But it is resolved.  It's like the "Dany isn't a real Targaryen because of the lemon tree" argument - a vague feeling of dissatisfaction with one anecdotal circumstance turns things on their head. 

    The identity of Jon Arryn's killer was deliberately confused by LF and Lysa lying and leaving a false trail.  In contrast both Jaime and Tyrion independently come to the conclusion that it was Joffrey and when Tyrion makes a veiled insinuation to Joffrey he reacts uneasily.  Maybe that's not watertight or clear enough for some people but it's how the author chose to show it without the smoking gun of a confession like from Lysa (show don't tell).

    What relevance does a presumed third party assassination have to the plot now?

  12. 1 hour ago, John Suburbs said:

    Yes, the whole thing was a setup. Cersei only wanted to slut-shame Sansa to scotch the betrothal -- thus the fact that they were allowed to go off alone, and the hard riding, and the wine . . .   Joffrey was going to kill her, probably by drowning her in the river, because he thought this was necessary to protect his crown. 

    Still no.  His actions afterwards hardly bear this out.  He was just showing off.  And he can't take his drink (unsurprising as he's a teenager), something we see again at his wedding.  Under the influence his true character emerges -  arrogant and cruel.

  13. On 12/9/2022 at 3:23 PM, John Suburbs said:

    And when they reached the Trident and there was still no word of Bran's death, Joff took the opportunity to use Cersei's plan to slut-shame Sansa on their little date to kill her instead. But fortunately they ran into Arya and Micah.

    Erm, no.

    On 12/9/2022 at 2:38 AM, Phylum of Alexandria said:

    I can agree the Joffrey reveal wasn't exactly satisfying, but I chalk this up to shoddy execution on GRRM's part. I don't think this plot thread is coming back at any point.

    Indeed.  He's said that the readership have had plenty of time to come up with solutions to mysteries that they find more satisfying than his own plot resolutions.  This is a prime example.  It's a little underwhelming but actually better than LF being some evil genius behind everything bad or destabilising that happens in Westeros.  There are plenty of other actors spreading chaos or conflict for their own reasons - Balon, Euron, Theon, Roose, Ramsay, Walder Frey, Doran, Arianne, Cersei, and in this case Joffrey.

  14. 5 hours ago, Gilbert Green said:

    Colemon is neither a quick thinker nor a smooth talker.  And he is obviously very nervous about something.  And he almost DOES blurt out what it was that he gave Sweetrobin.  Then he thinks better of it and stops himself.

    LF has already implicated himself by ordering doses, and arguing with Colemon about the dangers.   You are essentially saying LF would never do what we know he has done.

    There is no need for LF to suddenly say "my man Colemon, let's slow-murder Sweetrobin".   And by the time Colemon puts 1 and 1 and 1 and 1 together, he's already an accomplice.

    Colemon is a weak man, who wants to follow orders and avoid trouble.  The situation probably developed slowly with every new dose making him more and more guilty.  He's like a frog in a pot being slowly heated.

    Vitamins would be anachronism, but never mind.  I get the idea.  My answer is this:  If it was only vitamins, he would have said "I only gave him vitamins".  Instead he says "I only..." then stops himself, and suddenly asks about nosebleeds.  And he seems to also associate nosebleeds with sweetsleep poisoning.

    And you can hardly be serious.  Would GRRM really tease a mystery like this, and have the solution be "health supplements"?

    I get this is your view.  It's all conjecture.  You pose no credible reason for Colemon, who served the Arryns long before LF was appointed, to acquiesce in poisoning Robert.

    Sansa knows LF has had Colemon prescribe sweetsleep to Robert.  There is no mystery that Colemon needs to keep hidden.  We all know LF has Colemon administer sweetsleep.  The point is that Colemon prescribes it as a powerful medicine with side effects and sometimes against his better judgment due to the danger of cumulative dosage not as some moustache-twirling dastardly act for no discernible reason.  There is simply no reason for Colemon to panic at Sansa proposing more sweetsleep as he can simply say he's already given him a dose to get him down the mountain

    You're being pedantic over vitamins but never mind.  The equivalent in Westeros would be herbal remedies or tinctures added to his milk - if indeed anything is added at all.  It's equally possible he finds milk other than Lysa's breast milk different or unpleasant.  These are simple and obvious answers to why he finds the milk tastes "vile",

    Are you serious? :rolleyes:

  15. On 12/4/2022 at 5:05 PM, Gilbert Green said:

    I think Colemon is deliberately slow-poisoning him on LF's orders.

    If this is the case then the whole scene with Alayne telling Colemon to give him sweetsleep because her Lord Father would want it and him objecting doesn't work.  He would simply say LF had foreseen the problem of getting Robert down the mountain and he had already administered a dose on LF's orders.

    Maesters control the ravens.  I do think Colemon is weak but if he was ordered by LF to do this he could send a bird to KL - or more likely every Arryn loyalist in The Vale - and then LF is toast.  Also, LF is more careful than to implicate himself like this.

    But what is Colemon's motive for wishing Robert dead?  Plus he is making himself an accessory to murder and the holder of a dangerous secret that would likely see him killed in short order to protect it.

    On 12/4/2022 at 5:05 PM, Gilbert Green said:

    You never answered my question about the "something vile" that Colemon is secretly administering in Sweetrobin's drink.  See my quotes posted above.

    Could be vitamin supplements or anything.  Health supplements and a lot of medicines are known to taste odd and children to complain that medicine tastes horrid. 

    Don't forget that Lysa was still breast feeding Robert until recently (we saw that in Catelyn's visit to The Eyrie in AGOT) so any milk he is now provided with will taste different or odd or "vile".

  16. 21 hours ago, Gilbert Green said:

    Irrelevant.

    It's really not.  I don't see why it's so hard to accept that Alayne has influence because of her status as LF's "daughter" and that Colemon has a conversation with her and follows her wishes in a way he would not otherwise do.

    The position you have taken is only necessary if you argue Robert is being deliberately poisoned and are determined to blame Colemon and defend Sansa.  As I don't think he's being deliberately poisoned by either Colemon or Sansa I don't have this constraint and can say that 1) Colemon is prescribing medicine but is concerned about the frequency of the dose but is being influenced by LF (and Sansa ONCE) and 2) Sansa has an ambiguity about her thoughts in the Alayne persona, deliberately created by GRRM, but I do not believe she will harm Robert knowingly.

    The only person who wants Robert Arryn out of the way is LF and not until he has secured another means of holding on to power.

    17 hours ago, Springwatch said:

    There are still mysteries, but Colemon's guilt isn't one of them.

    Guilt as to what?  Jeopardising Robert's long term health?  Possibly but Robert is given to fits and is sickly so his long term health is poor.  If he continues to administer doses beyond what is safe that result in lasting harm or fatality then absolutely, yes, he will be guilty.  But of medical malpractice or murder?

    Medicines do come with risks - any prescription medicine will summarise them.  The amount of medicine / the dosage and frequency of treatment depend on the individual, there is always judgment involved however much people like to think of these issues as black and white.

    Also, a maester is not a physician in out sense - the links they forge in their chain at The Citadel cover many areas - and Colemon advises on politics as much as provides medical services.  He advises / serves the Lord of The Vale and does not have final say over Robert's treatment.  Even in our system medical experts advise governments who make policy (e.g. the debate over COVID lockdowns).  If LF pressures him to administer hemlock and he does then he's guilty.  But if LF pressures him to administer slightly more swseetsleep than he thinks safe it becomes a judgment call. 

  17. 8 hours ago, Gilbert Green said:

    If a serving maid had said the same thing, Colemon would have had no choice but to realize that what the serving maid said was true.  The identity of the serving-maid's father has nothing to do with it.

    An odd comparison.  A serving maid would have kept her mouth shut and would not have dared interfere.  A serving maid would not have referenced Lord Petyr's wishes to overcome the objections of the maester (her social superior).  A serving maid would have known and kept in her place.

    But then, Alayne is no serving maid and does not act like one.

  18. 7 hours ago, Springwatch said:

    So he is. That's not enough reason to scoop the responsibility off Colemon and dump it onto Sansa.

    If the intern was telling you to poison the firm's owner, so her parent/your boss could steal it - you would say no. Everyone would say no. It's not a marginal decision.

    I agree with the first part, but sweetsleep is a medicinal remedy and it's use in moderation is legitimate.  No one is telling Colemon to poison Robert Arryn, they are telling him to up the morphine/ steroids to keep Robert stable and he is going along under protest because it's dangerous.

    2 hours ago, Gilbert Green said:

    Nobody denies that Colemon is a morally weak character.  But moral weakness is not an excuse for murder. 

    Colemon understands the long term risks versus the short term benefit better than anyone.  He is concerned that LF is relying on sweetsleep to keep Robert stable and that this is unsustainable.  Medicines have side effects, something we know well, and this is what Colemon is wrestling particularly as he does not have full prescribing authority as a modern doctor would and political considerations are trumping purely medical ones.

    Neither Colemon nor Sansa is trying to kill Robert.

    2 hours ago, Gilbert Green said:

    Sansa has no "clout" whatsoever in this case.  

    Sansa, BTW, never threatens to tell LF anything.  She merely makes a perfectly true statement about what LF would want.

    She doesn't have to.  She expresses LF's wishes.  You put the quote in yourself.  My comment was in response to @Springwatch saying Sansa has no authority over Colemon.  She does if she says what her father would want and people decide to listen.  The only reason a maester is having this conversation with and taking instruction from a 12/13 year old girl is because of who her "father" is.

  19. 17 hours ago, Springwatch said:

    Sansa does not have authority over Colemon, that's absurd. He's a maester, she's a child. Besides, his sworn loyalty is to his Lord Robert Arryn; even a regent can't override that - certainly not to the extent of poisoning him.

    Nor do we see LF threatening Colemon. If Colemon has been got at (and he is super nervy) - it could be someone else. With a better motive.

    Colemon is a fairly weak character and quite realistic for it.  Not everyone can stand up to authority on points of principle and we are looking at a hierarchical society.  There is a justifiable reason for LF to have Colemon administer sweetsleep to Robert so, despite his warnings about repeated doses being dangerous, there is no reason for him to suspect malicious intentions on LF's part (indeed LF needs Robert alive to exercise authority in his name).

    Colemon serves The Lord of The Eyrie which, with Robert a minor, means counselling but also obeying Lord Protector Petyr Baelish.  Alayne, as the "daughter" of the Lord Protector, doesn't need an official position to influence Colemon, she has considerable clout, if only by threatening to tell LF that Colemon is disobeying him or not taking care of Lord Robert's image with his bannermen.  It's like the boss's child being an intern - ignoring them when they speak in their parent's name could make your life very difficult.

  20. 18 hours ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

    No one ever gets to the end of that paragraph:

    “You had best take that up with the Lord Protector.” She pushed through the door and crossed the yard. Colemon only wanted the best for his charge, Alayne knew, but what was best for Robert the boy and what was best for Lord Arryn were not always the same. Petyr had said as much, and it was true. Maester Colemon cares only for the boy, though. Father and I have larger concerns.”

    It's pretty clear throughout the exchange she's doing what LF would do and the reasons for doing it override her apparent care for SR. LF wants more power (and Sansa, which she knows), but they are both defying the throne and committing treason by hiding Sansa. She is trusting LF as far as she dare because she wants to continue living without being in Cersei's tender clutches.

    I think what Sansa is doing here is trying to act like a Lord/Lady and guard against the obviously negative impact on Robert Arryn's image among his bannermen of all the shaking fits.  Colemon is in her view acting purely like a doctor without any considerations of politics or leadership (i.e. medical establishment vs political establishment over how to respond to COVID).

    You're right that she's playing along with being Alayne for self-preservation but a temporary coincidence of interests with LF doesn't make their larger concerns the same.  LF, if he is too be believed (always dubious proposition), expects Robert Arryn to die so is indifferent to his fate and is already moving onto Plan B of having Alayne marry Harry the Heir (the likely victim of an unfortunate accident) to allow him to retain his influence.  Sansa doesn't want any of that but she does want to remain safe and is as trapped as she was in KL, more so with the accusation of regicide hanging over her, so it's unclear how things will pan out.

    On one side you have her faulty memory, the development of the Alayne persona, LF's active manipulation / tutelage and her natural desire for self-preservation; on the other her natural empathy, her desire to be the opposite of Cersei and her Stark values and identity.  For me the emergence of Sansa on the ice bridge with the wind howling like a wolf while she did something brave to help Robert Arryn is a subtle moment within a key scene that shows how she will act or react unconsciously at pivotal moments.

  21. On 11/14/2022 at 4:34 PM, Mourning Star said:

    So she told Ned what she says later?

    "Your butcher's boy attacked the prince."

    Or is that an example of her "growing"?

    She told Ned what happened.  He calls her forward to repeat that.  This is pretty straightforward.

    The second line is from a sibling argument between Arya and Sansa later on at KL in AGOT when Sansa is still a fairly dislikeable 11 year old with her head in the clouds.  She is still prepared to brush away unpleasant realities about Joffrey and Cersei at this stage and she and Arya are at war so it is both part of her recasting events at The Trident into a more comfortable form and deliberately being nasty to Arya.

    Quite obviously her growth doesn't begin until after Ned's death when she finally sees Joffrey and Cersei as they are and all her dreams turn to dust and she really begins to see the world and people around her as they are.  It's not an instant switch and she doesn't become a genius or an adult overnight but her naivety and self-centredness disappear swiftly.  You have plenty of Sansa povs in the following books to see this.

    On 11/14/2022 at 4:34 PM, Mourning Star said:

    Did she change for the better though? I'm not so sure.

    The Sansa of AGOT does not show empathy for anyone, not because she is horrible but because she is a self-centred and entitled child of privilege.  All that disappears and we see repeated empathy for those around her as well as horror at Joffrey and Cersei's behaviour. 

    I would have thought helping Robert Arryn across the narrow ice bridge alone would be an obvious example of this.

    On 11/14/2022 at 4:34 PM, Mourning Star said:

    I also think you are kind of skipping over the irony that what we are reading here is literally the Song of Ice and Fire. So Sansa's story, could literally be described as a song.

    The idea of song works on multiple levels.  Most obviously for Sansa it is her fondness for chivalrous ballads that give her a romantic view of the world.  She sees the world thought a filter of song - see her comment to LF about why Ned should have sent Loras rather than Beric after Gregor Clegane - and believes she is living in her own romantic Disney drama with a fairy-tale marriage to the handsome Prince and a life of wonder at Court ahead of her.  Until it all comes crashing down when reality intrudes. It's a key moment in her character development.

    The Sansa of ADWD doesn't want to be in a fairy-tale, she just wants to survive and for someone to marry her for herself not for her claim.  She is still a prisoner, and still a child, so how it goes is to be determined but saying she hasn't grown or changed since early AGOT is an odd assessment of her story.

    On 11/14/2022 at 4:34 PM, Mourning Star said:

    She is asked to tell the truth in defense of her family and she chooses not to, the result is the death of her wolf.

    I don't think so.  Cersei wanted blood for Joffrey's injury: she wanted Jaime or Robert to punish Arya; she would certainly have demanded Nymeria's death and this is why Jory and Arya drove her away; Lady is the only target she can reach and Robert is too weak to stand up to her over it.

     

  22. On 11/4/2022 at 1:44 PM, Mourning Star said:

    What did Sansa tell Ned? What truth? It’s not clear that she defended her sister in the least.

    Well, I was going to quote the text but it was already quoted before you typed this response so I wonder if there's any point.  She told Ned the night Arya disappeared, so the day of the incident.  Given the events are relayed through her pov we know exactly what she sees and given Ned calls her forward to confirm Arya's account we can also surmise what she told him.  This is not difficult to follow.

    On 11/4/2022 at 6:25 PM, Mourning Star said:

    No!

    She could have told the truth!

    Morality matters! Are we reading the same series? Lol

    Morality does matter.  Telling the truth would not have saved Mycah, though it would have made some readers more sympathetic to Sansa.  The political fall-out would have been even more damaging and dangerous than it was, if it didn't cause the betrothal to be broken off or a rupture between Robert and Ned.  And I'm not sure we are reading the same series :P

    On 11/6/2022 at 1:47 PM, MissM said:

    She knew what happened, she was there and saw everything and chose not to say. Then goes on to blame her sister and wishing death upon her. 

    Also, I think @chrisdaw is right:

    In regards to the conversation about the dire wolves and the Starks the point was made (I forget by whom) that Lady was dead and Sansa still alive to which I replied that Sansa wasn't really much of a Stark anymore. IIRC (this is a little hazy), at this point GRRM kind of leaned back in his chair, smiled and said something to the effect of "A very astute observation." 

    The two incidents are far apart in time.  She panics when called by Robert to tell the truth and says she doesn't remember.  This of course infuriates Arya - who knows that Sansa can but won't back her up (for whatever reason).  Later in KL she says something horrible to Arya but this is really an unpleasant sibling argument.  As a character Sansa changes a lot from after AGOT when she learns life is not a song.

    I wish GRRM had not given that mysterious little comment as it tends to raise speculation about "Dark Sansa" to fever pitch.  The girl who spoke up for Dontos, a complete stranger, when Joffrey was going to have him killed for being drunk, or who empathised with Lancel after his wound, or felt sorry for Tyrion even though these two are Lannisters is still very much there.  You can see her warning Margaery about Joffrey and most germane of all, leading a near-fitting Robert Arryn over a narrow ice bridge on the descent from The Eyrie.  So much for killing him for convenience or as a path to power.

    On 11/6/2022 at 7:56 PM, SeanF said:

    Does it matter, if Sansa kills Sweetrobin?

    It does but only if you want Sansa to be the child of Ned and Cat rather than LF's protégé.  Annoying little shit though he is, he is her cousin, an ill, lonely and vulnerable child.

    On 11/7/2022 at 3:17 PM, Mourning Star said:

    Not telling the truth when called upon to do so in defense of a family member is a betrayal.

    It's not a trial, though.  Cersei apparently might want it to be and as we learn from Jaime in AFFC (iirc) she has already been trying to persuade him to harm or kill Arya and this represents her last chance to get some revenge - ultimately exacted on Lady. Indeed after Robert dismisses it as a children's quarrel Cersei demands "I want her punished".  But Robert does not ever consider or act as if Arya is on trial.  We see the scene from Ned's pov and he's angry that Arya is brought before Robert on Cersei's orders but he doesn't regard it as a trial.

    On 11/7/2022 at 4:21 PM, Mourning Star said:

    It's a fan fiction account that is not from ASoIaF.

    The meaning of the post you are picking at is pretty clear: Sansa and Joffrey hear swordplay so the "hidden fighters" are an unknown danger from Sansa's pov.  Joffrey does arrogantly assure her that she is safe with him.  He does go to look over Sansa's objections but he also intends to keep her safe.  You're quibbling over Joffrey's primary motivation - to look out of curiosity - and his underlying and stated intention - to keep Sansa safe from any possible harm - because the post referenced the second underlying intention.  That is not fanfiction :blink:

    On 11/7/2022 at 6:30 PM, Mourning Star said:

    Sansa knows the truth, she is called on to tell the truth in defense of her sister against accusations that have already seen one person killed, and she does not tell the truth. This is a betrayal in my book, call it whatever you want.

    Arya is not on trial though.  Sansa is not brought in to give testimony in the trial of Arya Stark for attacking the Crown Prince for which the penalty is death.  If those were the circumstances and she consciously withheld testimony that resulted in Arya's conviction and execution / other punishment then she would certainly be guilty of betrayal.  But those are not the circumstances. 

    Also, you might want to be careful with accusing people of fanfiction when you interpret a scene in a certain way.  Tyrion is tried for Joffrey's murder.  See the difference in how the actual trial is conducted to Robert asking some children to explain what happened?

    On 11/7/2022 at 6:44 PM, Mourning Star said:

    Also, again, she is called on by the defense, Ned.

    Huh? Ned is looking for his daughter and comes in demanding why she was brought to Robert not him once found.  He's not the defence, he's an angry parent, demanding to know why she isn't being looked after properly.  It's not a Court, no one is appointed Prosecution or Defence Counsel.......

    On 11/7/2022 at 8:09 PM, Mourning Star said:

    Not taking a side, especially in a situation like this, is still taking a side. Refusing to come to her sisters defense, or even just stating the truth as she knew it (which would be a defense of Arya in this case), was a betrayl imo.

    Again, I'm not sure this distinction is meaningful here, this was hardly a formal court setting to begin with.

    Not giving evidence means just that in a court of law.  You can read into it what you want but taking the 5th or whatever equivalent does not count as backing up or refuting anyone's testimony.

    At least you are aware it's not a court or trial.

    On 11/7/2022 at 8:19 PM, Mourning Star said:

    A character's actions and thoughts so far in the story is what we have to work with when trying to predict the future.

    But, it does seem to be in Sansa's nature to act in her self interest over loyalty to her family, at least so far. I think that's the connection here.

    If only characters could have growth.  Is the Theon of ADWD the same person as the Theon of ACOK?  And naive, romance-filled 12 year-old Sansa who wanted nothing more than to marry the handsome prince and live a fairy-tale life at Court has changed a great deal since AGOT.

    On 11/8/2022 at 1:45 PM, chrisdaw said:

    She is making him temporarily more pliant to the detriment of his long term health, as has been explained to her, which is the purpose of the storyline.

    How many times and how much control does she have over this?  She's at most a pawn of LF who is trying to rope her in and so taint her by unwitting involvement.

    On 11/8/2022 at 7:30 PM, GMantis said:

    Not really. What was explained to her was that Sweetrobin could be given two more doses as long as he wasn't given any more in six months, so as far as Sansa knows he's not currently in danger of suffering long term effects.

    This is my thought and I'm not sure how much she knows of potential dangers.

    A Feast for Crows - Alayne II

    "It was too soon. My lady, you do not understand. As I've told the Lord Protector, a pinch of sweetsleep will prevent the shaking, but it does not leave the flesh, and in time . . ."
    "Time will not matter if his lordship has a shaking fit and falls off the mountain. If my father were here, I know he would tell you to keep Lord Robert calm at all costs."
    "I try, my lady, yet his fits grow ever more violent, and his blood is so thin I dare not leech him any more. Sweetsleep . . . you are certain he was not bleeding from the nose?"
    "He was sniffling," Alayne admitted, "but I saw no blood."
     
    There is nothing there to suggest she is aware of any particular danger.
     
    Then there's this:

    A Feast for Crows - Alayne II

    Then all at once she was at the bottom with Mya and her little lord, huddled beneath a twisted, rocky spire. Ahead stretched a high stone saddle, narrow and icy. Alayne could hear the wind shrieking, and feel it plucking at her cloak. She remembered this place from her ascent. It had frightened her then, and it frightened her now. "It is wider than it looks," Mya was telling Lord Robert in a cheerful voice. "A yard across, and no more than eight yards long, that's nothing."
    "Nothing," Robert said. His hand was shaking.
    Oh, no, Alayne thought. Please. Not here. Not now.
    "It's best to lead the mules across," Mya said. "If it please my lord, I'll take mine over first, then come back for yours." Lord Robert did not answer. He was staring at the narrow saddle with his reddened eyes. "I shan't be long, my lord," Mya promised, but Alayne doubted that the boy could even hear her.
    When the bastard girl led her mule out from beneath the shelter of the spire, the wind caught her in its teeth. Her cloak lifted, twisting and flapping in the air. Mya staggered, and for half a heartbeat it seemed as if she would be blown over the precipice, but somehow she regained her balance and went on.
    Alayne took Robert's gloved hand in her own to stop his shaking. "Sweetrobin," she said, "I'm scared. Hold my hand, and help me get across. I know you're not afraid."
    He looked at her, his pupils small dark pinpricks in eyes as big and white as eggs. "I'm not?"
    "Not you. You're my winged knight, Ser Sweetrobin."
    "The Winged Knight could fly," Robert whispered.
    "Higher than the mountains." She gave his hand a squeeze.
    Lady Myranda had joined them by the spire. "He could," she echoed, when she saw what was happening.
    "Ser Sweetrobin," Lord Robert said, and Alayne knew that she dare not wait for Mya to return. She helped the boy dismount, and hand in hand they walked out onto the bare stone saddle, their cloaks snapping and flapping behind them. All around was empty air and sky, the ground falling away sharply to either side. There was ice underfoot, and broken stones just waiting to turn an ankle, and the wind was howling fiercely. It sounds like a wolf, thought Sansa. A ghost wolf, big as mountains.
    And then they were on the other side, and Mya Stone was laughing and lifting Robert for a hug. "Be careful," Alayne told her. "He can hurt you, flailing. You wouldn't think so, but he can." They found a place for him, a cleft in the rock to keep him out of the cold wind. Alayne tended him until the shaking passed, whilst Mya went back to help the others cross.
     
    This is who Sansa is.  Interestingly, it's all Alayne's thoughts and actions until the wind is howling like a wolf and then it's very deliberately Sansa.  She knows who she is and she's still a Stark.
  23. On 10/3/2022 at 3:28 AM, Nevets said:

    Of course he wants FArya back.  She's his hostage against the Northerners.  Without her safety to worry about, there's nothing stopping them from tearing him into itsy bitsy pieces.  Her absence probably isn't known yet, but it will be, and he needs her back.

    Indeed, (F)Arya is essential to his claim to WF succeeding.  Until she bears him an heir he can claim to be the grandchild of Ned Stark he is on incredibly shaky ground.  He needs her back to cement his claim and establish his dynasty.  And as you say she is his hostage for the Northern Lords' good behaviour.  Without her he's a bastard Bolton in a Stark castle with no legitimacy and a whole host of enemies.

    Tywin proposed the same marriage-inheritance plan to Tyrion but with Sansa as bride.  That plan would collapse as well if Sansa ran off without Tyrion having an heir.

    I'm surprised there is an argument Ramsay doesn't want or need (F)Arya back.

×
×
  • Create New...