teej6

I hear you. Thanks!

Okay let’s go over this one more time. I said Sansa will backstab LF and if that were to happen that would be great. You seem to have latched onto the word backstab and ran with it. You seem to have mistakenly taken the word out of context in your initial response and instead of admitting your error, you subsequently started, rather poorly, attempting to justify your initial mistake. No one (but you) would take my initial statement of Sansa backstabbing LF as anything but a positive. As for you misinterpreting my posts, I blame that solely on your lack of comprehension and not on any of my posts. I was quite clear in what I meant in my statements. I took issue with your constant use of “inner themes” as it sounded more like a juvenile attempt at sounding smart.

English is my first language. Nice try at being snide! I don’t care if backstabbing has a negative connotation, the point is (which you seem not to understand or don’t want to as that would mean conceding your whole argument was wrong) no one would see/read Sansa backstabbing LF as a flaw in her character. In fact, most everyone would appreciate the character better if that were to happen. As to the rest of your post, I see no point taking this discussion any further as you keep misinterpreting (I suspect English isn’t your first language ) my posts and rewording it in your responses to suit your narrative. And trust me, I don’t need your validation or there’s no need to be sad, I’ve been discussing Sansa’s arc with people much more well versed and savvy than you and I’ve still maintained that Sansa in the first book was intentionally written by the author to be dislikable. And I don’t know if you understood it (inspite of my repeated statements), I do not dislike Sansa... was just providing a rationale for the dislike people feel towards her. I disliked her in the first book as a character, but in subsequent books, the character has grown on me.

In regards to the bolded section, I offered the very same reasons (or analysis as you claim) in my first response to you. Again, I question your comprehension skills for not seeing/understanding this from the get go and I’m tired of repeating the same thing over and over again with you. And I don’t know what the hell you mean by “deeper themes”. If it makes you feel smarter repeating that phrase, go ahead. I gave you Sansa’s arc as I see it in AGOT and that is how many others view her character as well in the first book. And that is not due to a lack of understanding of the character, it’s simply because that’s how the character is perceived by many. You can disagree with that interpretation but belittling others interpretation or understanding is what you did, and what I took issue with. And as to your last para, again I have trouble understanding you. In my initial post, I stated that I find Sansa’s resignation to her fate and trust in LF disturbing but that I also consider the possibility that Sansa is biding her time and playing LF and learning from him and will eventually defeat him at his own game. However, I’m not certain of this outcome as much as her hardcore fans are. If that happened, that would be a nice outcome for character arc — the apprentice becoming the master. In my initial post, I used the term backstabbing to describe Sansa’s betrayal of LF (which btw is a good progression in Sansa’s arc, most everyone will agree that Sansa backstabbing LF is a hurray moment), which somehow in your convoluted reasoning you interpreted as hypocrisy. And on and on we went with this pointless debate. So ending this discussion... don’t see any point in rehashing this mess over and over again.

Stating that people who disagree with your opinion of a character does not fully comprehend the story as you do is not “engaging intellectually” with them. And yes, I still dispute your interpretation that people dislike Sansa because of their lack of understanding of the character. In my first post I explained why people disliked Sansa in the first book — because she was written as such by the author. In subsequent books, GRRM decided to show the character’s growth and realization of her follies and hence people began to like and appreciate the character more. As simple as that. And as to you harping on the themes within her story — the theme of AGOT Sansa was that she was a sheltered, naive, spoiled, vain, self-centered, dishonest, disloyal (to her family) person as compared to her little sister, who is loyal, compassionate, empathetic (to people less fortunate than her), and honest. And empathizing with a character goes a long way in understanding a character. And if you don’t know that basic tenet of storytelling, there’s no point having this debate. I’ll admit Mycah would probably have been killed no matter what although it doesn’t state anywhere in the book that he was already dead when Sansa was asked to tell the truth. Yes, Sandor was already out hunting the boy and he would have killed him whatever the outcome. As to Lady’s death, we don’t know how Robert would have reacted if Sansa had corroborated Arya’s story. He already was looking for a reason to spare Ned and his children. Confirming that Joffrey was the initial aggressor would perhaps have given him a reason to fully silence Cersei. We just don’t know and that’s the point. Well, Cersei already knew that Arya beat and humiliated Joffrey, that wasn’t in dispute. Why for crying out loud, Arya admitted to it. What was being disputed was the version of events...who attacked first, who was the aggressor. Here’s the quote: “That’s not true,” Arya said loudly. “She just bit him a little. He was hurting Mycah.” “Joff told us what happened,” the queen said. “You and the butcher boy beat him with clubs while you set your wolf on him.” And then we have Arya giving her version of events, which IIRC we know is true from Ned’s thoughts as Sansa had confirmed it to him before. So your argument that in Sansa telling the truth she would have endangered her sister’s life does not hold much merit. As seen from the quote above Cersei and Joffrey had distorted the truth to imply Arya and Mycah attacked Joffrey and Joffrey was an innocent victim. And based on this, Cersei was already asking for Arya to be punished. Sansa confirming Arya’s version would have put Joffrey in a worse light and Robert may would then be able to justify not punishing anyone, even Lady. And for the last time, yes, I do see Sansa’s betrayal of LF as a good thing and using the term “stabbing in the back” to describe the act of a victim finally breaking free of her captor is not a bad thing. I can’t help it if you can’t comprehend that and twisting my words and trying to prove your point doesn’t help your argument. And since you seem to conveniently forget what I stated, I’ll say it again — Sansa’s behaviour and interactions with LF now is probably an act and at the right moment she will break free. However, I’m not as sure as you that she is fully cognizant of LF’s treachery and motives — she may still trust him to some level.

Well the topic of the OP is “Why do people hate Sansa”? No one is debating whether Sansa’s character is developed or not. By comparing AGOT Sansa to Arya, I wasn’t stating her character was underdeveloped but rather a foil — contrasting her sister’s character — and hence perhaps the dislike for her character in the first book. It seems like you are confusing character development for like/dislike of a character. Sansa doesn’t have to be a minor character in the story to be disliked. Many a protagonist in many a story are dislikable. To me it seems that you are terribly confused and the one that does not seem to understand how literary critique/analysis works. The point I made with empathy is that some people like characters that they empathize with or identify with. It does not necessarily have to be the case. Other times people like characters with certain ideals/virtues that they aspire to. That’s why you still have heroes and villains in stories. Good writers are able to make the reader feel/empathize with the antagonist as well. And, no one is debating whether you can write an essay or analyze this or that character. The topic of the OP, again, is why people dislike Sansa. One can analyze the intricacies of the character as you put it and still dislike the character. The two are not mutually exclusive. Telling the truth at the Trident would have probably saved Lady’s/Mycah’s lives, we don’t know. And the point of telling the truth is not to benefit anyone, it is the merit of the act itself. By failing to tell the truth (or not remember), Sansa’s character was contrasted against that of her little sister who did speak the truth but was abandoned by her big sister. This was a defining moment in Sansa’s arc in AGOT for many readers like myself, which showed Sansa’s lack of character in the first book. However, as I mentioned before, as the story progressed, and Sansa broke free (somewhat) of her childish fantasies and naivete, she definitely became more likable. Again, your convoluted line of thinking and calling my argument hypocritical is lost on me. I stated that Sansa’s trust in LF is troubling but also noted that it could be an act on her part and she may end up turning the tables on him/stabbing him in the back at the opportune moment. (And, FYI, back stabbing LF is a good thing). I’ll break it down for you. First part of the sentence (the trust part) troubling to me, although I’m hoping that this is an act, ergo the second part — her taking down LF (good part). Clear? No hypocrisy in that statement. I clearly stated I do not want Sansa to trust LF, which to me is a flaw. Again, it seems like you’re the one that doesn’t understand the concept of hypocrisy or are having trouble comprehending.

Well I gave you my reasons for why people like myself found AGOT Sansa dislikable. And yes, I do think you are wrong in your vain assumption that the dislike for her character comes “from a lack of grasp on the inner themes”, whatever that means. Just because people don’t subscribe to your views doesn’t make them any less literary savvy than you. I’m sure a lot of them have much better comprehension skills than you do. People identify and empathize with different characters in the books and the fact that some people can’t empathize or excuse AGOT Sansa’s actions doesn’t mean their interpretation of the character is wrong, it just means it’s different from yours. That happens you know with literary works, that’s why you have book clubs and discussion groups. As for the Trident incident, Sansa did have a choice. She chose not to tell the truth because she thought Joffrey would love her less. She made a choice, and you may agree with the choice but other readers may not. Calling their opinion “bull shit” is childish. I don’t know what the hell you mean in the last paragraph. All I was trying to say was that Sansa’s trust and reliance in LF (which very well could be an act but as of now there’s no sure way of knowing is there?) is getting to be a bit disturbing but I admit that I believe (or hope) she will turn the tables on LF when he least expects it. Don’t know where your hypocrisy argument is stemming from. And FYI, I like post AGOT Sansa just fine. And I’m even rooting for her to take down LF.

Well just because people don’t agree with your views on a character that does not mean they do not have a “good grasp on the inner themes of the story...” Sansa, in my view, was initially written by GRRM as a foil to Arya’s heroic arc. Ergo, Arya identifying with the poor and downtrodden, for instance the butcher’s boy, whereas Sansa being disgusted by the boy’s smell. Or when Arya is willing to tell the truth about the incident at the Trident but Sansa isn’t. Even in this instance, GRRM has Arya shouting out against them killing Lady (just after Sansa had refused to support Arya’s version of the events) whereas Sansa screaming it’s Arya’s and Nymeria’s fault. GRRM clearly draws out the difference in the characters of the sisters. Then we have Sansa’s betrayal of her father’s trust. We can debate ad nauseam on whether Sansa’s betrayal helped Cersei or not but that’s not the point. The point is Sansa, after witnessing Cersei and the Lannisters’ (Jamie had killed Jory and she knew of her father’s dislike of the Lannisters) actions till then, could still run to Cersei and reveal her father’s plan when she was expressly asked not to do so by Ned. Now before you go saying that she was only a child, GRRM wrote Arya as being two years younger than Sansa but still being able to recognize Cersei and Joffrey for who they truly were. Sansa’s arc in AGOT, in my view, was intentionally written by GRRM as disloyal, naive, selfish, and, snobbish (sorry couldn’t resist ) for the readers to identify with her little sister who was the opposite in every way. My gripe with AGOT Sansa is that she was willing to admit (yes reluctantly) that her father is a traitor so as to be able marry Joffrey. Yes, she justifies this by stating that she can convince her prince to show mercy and exile her father and then bring him back after a while. The fact that she is capable of thinking through all of this but is not able to see or even worse does not want to admit that Cersei and her son are monsters is what rubbed me the wrong way about AGOT Sansa. By acknowledging her father is a traitor, she is turning her back on her family and her father’s values. You might ask what else is a frightened eleven year old to do. But we have her thoughts when she agrees to write the letters, and it’s not fear for her life that causes her to write Cersei’s letters but it is her desire to marry Joffrey and be his queen. All Cersei had to dangle in front of Sansa in writing the letters calling her father a traitor was the threat of her not being able to marry Joff and be his queen. Post AGOT Sansa, is definitely more interesting and likable, and her POV chapters show that she is able to recognize people’s characters and their motives better and admit their flaws. She longs for her family and home again. The only issue I have is her resignation to her fate and her trust in Littlefinger. She knows Littlefinger’s darkest secrets, yet as Alayne, she pretends to herself that he knows best and is looking out for their interests. Perhaps this is the calm before the storm and she will stab LF in the back at the opportune moment. But to me there’s also a bit of Stockholm syndrome with Sansa’s and LF’s dynamics... he’s become the mentor/father figure in her life and she is slowly becoming an accomplice in his crimes and dealings. We’ll just have to wait and see what happens in Winds.

To me, the Mercy chapter does not imply that she has left the FM. Arya has always had a mind of her own — she never lost her independence or ability to think for herself. She went rogue by killing Dareon but that doesn’t mean she left the order. Oh I’m certain she will leave the FM eventually but it just hasn’t happened as yet in the books.

In the books, Arya is still very much part of the FM. I like how all the recent Stark haters keep confusing Show info for the books. Sometimes I doubt these posters have even fully read the books.

And I believe you’re smart enough to know that my question was a rhetorical one

What’s your point? Most discussions on this forum are about disecting and explaining characters from a fantasy novel.

If you recall it is implied that this “old man” is an insurance agent who’s cheated his customers, and one such merchant/merchant’s family put a hit on him. He sells insurance to merchant ship captains and has to pay out if the ship sinks or is attacked/looted by pirates. It is strongly implied that he doesn’t always keep to his end of the bargain. So the old man is no innocent. Besides, it was not Arya’s choice to kill him but instead she was ordered to do so by the FM. And as she has committed herself to the FM, and is obligated to obey them, she doesn’t have must of a choice now does she? Inspite of that, the entire chapter shows exactly how Arya is NOT a mindless killing machine. Instead, she is following the man, trying to figure out who he is (whether he is good or bad) and is justifying killing him in her mind by deciding he is not a good person.

GRRM really needs to publish tWoW. This is getting really painful and tiresome.

Arya was not killing Harys Swyft’s (who btw is referred to as Lord Treasurer in the books) bodyguard, she was killing a known child murderer. Big difference. And what does the WotFK have anything to do with Arya’s kill? Arya is not fighting the WotFK. She doesn’t care two hoots about it. Arya is not “perverting the truth” as you say, she knows exactly what she is doing, she sees a child murderer whose atrocities she has witnessed first hand and she is exacting justice because she can. You may not like it but in no way is she denying the truth to herself. And how has Arya become corrupt? She still has a code she lives by. You can dislike her code/morals and her meting out her form of justice, but by no means is she corrupt. The only murder, I feel, that she commits that may be questionable in GRRM’s world of grey morality is killing Dareon. In this case also, she does not kill him without thought or for pleasure. She follows Dareon, figures out that he’s a deserter from the NW. Right or wrong, she believes in her mind that she is meting out justice to a deserter like her father would do. And if you are waiting for Arya to answer for her crimes (although I don’t see most of them as crimes rather as a child’s instinct to survive and adapt in a brutal world the only was she knows how), I highly doubt that is going to happen. Arya is going to find her way back home and to a semblance of normalcy. How and when that will happen we can speculate. As I see Arya’s bond with Jon closer than anything she’s experienced (she wouldn’t betray Jon not even to her father), I suspect Jon or something to do with Jon will have a big part to play in her return to Westeros and her pack.