Jump to content

Katerine459

Members
  • Content count

    181
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Katerine459

  • Rank
    Squire

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Location
    WI, USA

Recent Profile Visitors

959 profile views
  1. Katerine459

    [SPOILERS thru S7] Where did the show go wrong?

    I'm sorry about taking so long to respond... I took a long break from all things ASOIAF-related to focus on Marvel stuff for a while. When I first read this, many months ago, I didn't disagree, but the more I think about it, the more I realize that this is based on two very false assumptions: It's vitally important for the audience to know the person that Ramsay Bolton marries. We can't just care because a) she's forcibly married to somebody who routinely has hunting parties where he hunts people for sport, and b) Theon knows her and cares about her, and so she helps him remember that he's not Reek. Watching Sansa -- who's already a survivor thanks to surviving Joffrey and Cersei -- learn how to become a savvy game-player is inherently uninteresting. There's no way to make that interesting. My issues with the Sansa/Ramsay plotline are many, and mostly concern the fact that Littlefinger had no way of knowing that the Boltons wouldn't simply send Sansa back to KL in exchange for the reward Cersei was offering, along with the information that Littlefinger was the one who had Sansa all along, and LF is supposed to be savvier than that. And it exploited Sansa, as many others have pointed out. But it also, in many ways, committed the crime of making Sansa's story LESS interesting - because it doesn't lead to her developing in any ways that promise an interesting, important character in the future. The way that, say, watching the perfect lady survive Joffrey and Cersei and then learn at the feet of LF does.
  2. Katerine459

    [SPOILERS thru S7] Where did the show go wrong?

    I'm genuinely dumbstruck by people's tendencies to assume things are unrealistic, based solely on the fact that the character's actions don't match the way they think they themselves would act. What you call, "justifying," I call "reading for context." For 12-to-14-year-old nice peasant girl Tysha to react to her liege lord's considerable anger (when even your husband, his son, fears the guy) and the prospect of being gang raped, by being either struck dumb, terrified into silence, going into shock, feeling hopeless and alone, or all of the above, is many things - sad, unjust, etc. - but it is not unrealistic.
  3. Katerine459

    [SPOILERS thru S7] Where did the show go wrong?

    Just reread the recent posts, and realized that the main "believe-ability" issue in the books appears to be the idea that Tysha wouldn't have said anything. I actually think it would have been less believable if Tysha did say anything... and here's why: We don't know much about Tysha's character, but we do know that she was a peasant girl, somewhere around Tyrion's age (so somewhere between 12 and 14 at the time), and she was nice. Presumably, she lived in the lands owned by Tywin Lannister. And Tyrion had saved her from some would-be rapists. So now, put yourself in her shoes (TW: I'm about to describe some emotions surrounding a gang rape using the second person POV). You're a simple peasant girl, and the son of your liege lord(!!!) saves you from some would-be rapists. To your eyes, he seems like a fairy-tale, with the little exception of being a dwarf, being your age, and being far from handsome, but then, you're a peasant. And he clearly likes you, so you're polite and then nice to him, and then you find out that he's actually kind of sweet (as Tyrion at that age would definitely have been - we see traces of that even now, with the way he often treats Penny), and he's funny and smart... and yes, he's rich. You're a product of your times, which means you're constantly aware of the class system you live in. You become infatuated, and he's clearly in love with you, which is extremely flattering, and then he asks you to marry him. A few weeks pass, and you think this is actually going to work. But then (and here's where I'm drifting into a bit of speculation, as we don't know the exact circumstances from Tysha's point of view, but regardless of how it happened at first, the conclusion is the same), some knights come to your door and take you into custody. And they take you before Lord Tywin Lannister. The Lord Tywin Lannister. Your liege lord. And a man who is famous throughout Westeros for his history of wiping out the entire families of people who displease him -- to the point where there's a freaking song about it -- and you can tell at a glance that you have somehow seriously displeased him. There are seemingly hundreds of men in the room. You are terrified. He calls you the Westeros equivalent of a golddigger, and maybe a part of you thinks it's maybe true (you are, after all, still just a child yourself, and rather impressionable). He says that if you want the gold so much that you're willing to sell yourself for it, you will have your wish, and you wonder what that means... and the seemingly hundreds of men start to take off their clothes. Some of them are maybe even chuckling. And you realize what's about to happen. Tyrion comes in now, with his older brother, and you look at him pleadingly... and a stranger glares back at you. He's looking at you like you betrayed him. And you wonder if maybe it's true. Maybe you weren't as much in love with him as you thought... maybe it really was the money and the lifestyle that appealed to you. You also can't help but pick up on the vast difference in power between Tyrion and Tywin, and you realize that even if Tyrion would come to your defense, he couldn't. But he wouldn't, because whatever he's been told, he's no longer seeing you as a human being who doesn't want what's about to happen. You have absolutely no friends in this room. You are completely alone. So, no. No, you're not going to say anything. Even if you were physically capable of saying anything at this point (which you're not, because by now, your mind has taken its only defense and turtled up inside itself, leaving you standing there mute and staring at nothing), what would be the point? Other than to make Lord Tywin Lannister... of the Rains of Castamere fame... even more angry at you for defying him? So you turtle up inside yourself, let the men do what they will, then let Tyrion rip out the last shreds of your heart himself... and then, when you're finally dismissed, you take the money and anything that's left of your self-worth, and leave. That's the believable version of events. And it matches Tyrion's memories. There is absolutely no plot or character hole in GRRM's version of this story.
  4. Katerine459

    [SPOILERS thru S7] Where did the show go wrong?

    Wasn't Tyrion, like, 14 when the whole thing with Tysha happened? [Check that... I just looked it up... he was 13. Younger than what I originally thought!] Tyrion's story makes perfect sense in the books. He was an adolescent who idolized his older brother. Jaime was the only member of Tyrion's immediate family who didn't openly despise him, even showed some affection for him, and who hadn't called Tyrion a mother-murdering monster for literally Tyrion's entire life. He believe Jaime when Jaime said he'd set up the whole thing with Tysha because he idolized Jaime, because Tysha said she loved him and he didn't believe he was lovable, and because he was 14[13]. Tyrion is very smart, true, but how world-wise are you, really, at 14[13]? Who are you more likely to believe, the brother you've known your entire life or the girl you've known for a couple months? Especially when one of their stories fits with what you've been told your entire life (that you're unlovable), and the other person's story directly contradicts that (that you are lovable)? So he wound up believing Jaime, and letting Tysha be gang-raped (though he didn't understand it was rape at the time). Then, years later, after saving the city only to be shunted aside and forgotten by most, being forced to marry a child, being blamed by the people for Joffrey's monstrous actions, being put on trial for his life by his father and accused by his sister, having the woman he'd fallen in love with testify against him using lies mixed with truths that only she knew about (and I will never believe that book-Shae didn't choose to do that of her own free will), being found guilty and condemned to death... and THEN Jaime... arguably the one person in the world that Tyrion still trusted at all... tells him that he'd lied all those years ago, and Tysha really did love him, which meant that Tyrion had let her be gang-raped and then participated himself. He then finds the woman he loves in his father's bed (after his father had spent years openly despising Tyrion for his propensity for whores). And he snaps. What about this is unbelievable? I thought it was perfectly set up, as well as Tyrion's severe depression and PTSD in ADWD. It actually shows a great care for character development, to follow through with everything Tyrion had been through with the psychological effects of being through those things, even though those psychological effects made him less likable to many. I have mixed feelings about the show's treatment of him. On the one hand, I really, really like Tyrion. He's one of my favorite characters. And I love Peter Dinklage playing him, and it would be kind of hard to watch him become kind of unlikable, as he became in the books, after all this. It's also kind of hard, without access to his inner thoughts, to understand where it's coming from... the flashbacks and self-loathing that arose from... well, from his entire life, but especially from the events of ASOS, and most especially from the act of killing his father. Even with those inner thoughts, it was often hard for many to like him in ADWD. On the other hand... I really, really respect GRRM for not shying away from what Tyrion, as a human being who'd been through a very bad, love-starved, betrayal-filled life, would go through, and... I don't exactly resent D&D for not following through with it in their version -- at least, not in isolation. That is, if this were the only example of D&D not following through with character motivation and character development and character consistency (or showing any sign of caring about any of those things), I'd be more than fine with it. But it's not. Not by a long shot.
  5. Katerine459

    Favorite Character ranked poll

    The Academy Awards does RCV, yes. It's also used for political elections in Australia, Ireland, New Zealand, and a few other places, and just got implemented in Maine, USA for statewide elections, and it's also being done in several scattered cities for local elections. It has a large number of mathematical and social advantages over simple pluralities, and I wish it were being implemented more. Politicians on both sides hate it, though, because it makes it harder to cheat the system. Wrong Lannister. Tyrion is the best.
  6. Katerine459

    Favorite Character ranked poll

    Update. 54 people have voted so far, and here are the current results. If you haven't yet voted, it is an ongoing poll, and I'll try to post updates every few weeks or so (depending on whether the results have changed significantly). First round, Dany is leading with 24 votes, Jon has 8, Jaime and Davos have 5, Arya has 4, Tyrion 3, and Barristan, Cersei, Sam, Eddard, and Bran have 1 each. Nobody has a majority out of 54 voters, so we start eliminating. First, everybody who got 0 first-place votes gets eliminated. Sorry, Sansa, Catelyn, Brienne, and Theon. You never stood a chance. Barristan, Cersei, Sam, Eddard, and Bran are all tied for last place with 1 vote each. Each gets eliminated, one at a time (in a random order), and their votes are redistributed according to how that voter did their rankings. First one picked at random is Barristan, whose second-place vote went to Dany, upping her total to 25. Next Sam gets picked for elimination. The person who voted for him, voted for Tyrion next, upping Tyrion's total to 4. Next Bran is eliminated. His vote goes to Jaime, upping Jaime's total to 6. Next Cersei is eliminated. The very strange person who picked her as their favorite character, chose Arya as their next-favorite (of the non-eliminated characters), upping Arya's total to 5. Finally Eddard, the last person to have only 1 first-place vote, gets eliminated. His vote goes to Jon, upping Jon's total to 9. Now, an update: everyone has been eliminated except Dany (25), Jon (9), Jaime (6), Davos (5), Arya (5), and Tyrion (4). Tyrion's now in last place, so he gets eliminated, and his 4 votes go to Arya (2) and Jon (1). It appears that one person didn't much like anybody after Tyrion, because only 3 votes got redistributed. Davos (5) is now in last place, so he gets eliminated. His votes go to Jaime (2) and Jon (3). Arya (7) now gets eliminated. Her votes go to Jaime (3), Jon (3), and Dany (1). Update: it's down to the top 3. Dany's still in the lead with 26 votes. Jon's still in second with 16, and Jaime's in third with 11. Jaime (11) is eliminated, and his votes go to Dany (1), and Jon (7). The other 3 didn't choose anybody (not already eliminated) after Jaime. That seems like a lot for Jon, but it's not enough to offset the huge lead Dany had, and... Dany wins, with 27 votes to Jon's 23! Want to change it? Want to keep it the same? Please go vote... polls are still open!
  7. Katerine459

    [SPOILERS thru S7] Where did the show go wrong?

    First, welcome. I feel like I need to respond to this, because you quoted my post, but I'm afraid you missed my main point. The issue with the show is not that it's different than the books. The issue with the show is that the show writers do not care about internal logic, consistent worldbuilding, and consistent character-building, which is a crime against a series that's so popular precisely because it pays meticulous attention to those things. Let me use an example from the show that I feel is actually really good: the battle/massacre in S7:E4. I consider this to be the one really good part of S7. NOT because of the spectacle. The spectacle is incidental... it certainly didn't hurt, but it's not the reason it was good. It was good because the in-universe reason for the battle made more sense than none at all, because it was well built-up, because it didn't break any worldbuilding (that I'm aware of), because we as viewers felt a very real investment in the battle because there were people on both sides that we were rooting for, and because it did not leave us wondering why the characters were being so uncharacteristically stupid. So that battle was a really good scene. The entire series should have writing like that. But it doesn't. Most of the series now consists of the writers ignoring established characterization in order to split the world into nice neat lines of good and bad, where all the good people get along, and the bad people twirl mustaches. It consists of the writers ignoring established characterization to make them further the plot. It consists of a total disregard for consistent worldbuilding. It consists of plot armor, all over the place. It doesn't need to be the same as the books. In fact, it's probably a good thing that it isn't. But it should at least care about adhering to the things that made the series so popular in the first place. Lots and lots and lots of fantasy series feature dragons. That's not why ASOIAF stands out. It stands out for its complex characterizations, organic plot-building, and extremely rich and consistent world. The show doesn't need to be the same as the books. But the writers should at least try to care about the same general things that GRRM clearly cares about.
  8. Katerine459

    Favorite Character ranked poll

    My full ordering: Tyrion Arya Ned Daenerys Jon Bran Jaime Davos Cat Sam Sansa Barristan Brienne Theon (we're finally getting to characters I dislike) Cersei
  9. Katerine459

    Favorite Character ranked poll

    I wouldn't worry yet. Only 13 people have voted so far, which is still a pretty small sample size. When we've gotten at least 30, I think, that's when the results will truly mean something. Thanks for participating! (speaking as somebody who ranked Jaime #7 out of 15... I do really, really like him, it's just that there are 6 others I like more). Thanks again for participating! All others, please keep them coming!
  10. Katerine459

    Favorite Character ranked poll

    Taking advantage of a new Ranked Choice polling site, and made a "ranked favorite character" poll. Just for fun. :) This one's different from other polls in that you rank your choices and the winner is determined through a process of elimination. https://rcv-app.firebaseapp.com/poll/-LDwyvxC4wvCpqZ7iIM3 FYI, the characters listed are the book POV characters who a) exist in both the books and the TV show, and b) have at least 2 POV chapters. So if your absolute favorite isn't on there, that's the only reason why. Edit: if you've already voted, and just want to see the most recent results, they are here: https://rcv-app.firebaseapp.com/poll/-LDwyvxC4wvCpqZ7iIM3/results Thanks for participating!
  11. Katerine459

    [SPOILERS thru S7] Where did the show go wrong?

    That's... not what suspension of disbelief is about. Suspension of disbelief, in fantasy, is about being able to believe, at least during the time that you're engrossed in the world, that this is an actual world with actual people. It's a very different world from ours, but it's an actual world (at least while you're engrossed in it). GRRM pays meticulous attention to this, making sure that everything follows rules (geographical, historical, political, etc.), and making sure to get inside the heads of all his characters (even the non-POV characters) so they do what they would actually do in a given situation. This is precisely how the series became so loved. Lots of fantasy series have dragons and something like White Walkers. ASOIAF is in another category because GRRM pays such meticulous attention to internal logic, consistent and complex worldbuilding, character thought and behavior, and a natural progression of events. You mention deconstructing everything about high fantasy. But he's not deconstructing everything about high fantasy... only the high fantasy tropes that get in the way of suspension of disbelief. Plot armor. Cut and dried good and evil. Wars being started solely by one person's eeevil scheming. Lack of consequences. These are the tropes he gets rid of, and he does it because they interfere with suspension of disbelief, because that's not how humanity (something that's shared between the real world and the world of ASOIAF) operates. The showrunners, however, not only don't pay attention to this, they don't seem to even understand, or care, about the concept of "internal logic." Witness their mocking viewers for having a problem with the impossible - within the world of ASOIAF - distances covered from north of the Wall to Dragonstone, when people are ok with dragons. People who don't understand the fundamental difference between those two things, have no business taking on a property that's so popular precisely because it was written by somebody who pays meticulous attention to internal logic. Yeah, Stannis burning Shireen. That's another one. :| Thanks for reminding me.
  12. Katerine459

    [SPOILERS thru S7] Where did the show go wrong?

    My apologies for the late reply. Just came back, and saw that this thread was revived at some point during my absence. A lot of interesting stuff got said, but I particularly wanted to respond to this one. You're correct that 50 different book readers will come up with 50 different interpretations of, say, Sansa's character and what we expect to see of her in the next book. However, that's not the same thing as implying that there is no such thing as, "in-character" or "out-of-character" for Sansa. There are many, many things that fall under the umbrella of "in-universe logic," and all of them are important. And none of them are being paid any attention at all, by the show writers, unless they fall under the umbrella of "visual effects." This is a problem. Some of these things are actual in-universe facts, that are being utterly ignored by the writers. The oft-mentioned example of the impossible distances covered in 7.6. Plus the ridiculously short time it took Sam to travel from Oldtown to Winterfell, in a horse-drawn buggy with a woman and an infant, in winter. And some of them are a bit more ambiguous, but are still important. Being in character. I mentioned this in my original post, but I'll rephrase here: as a writer or as a reader/viewer, you should always be able to think of any given character as an autonomous person. Autonomous people decide for themselves what they are going to do, and how they are going to act. That means whatever they do, however they react to whatever situation they're faced with, has to be consistent with their established way of thinking and their established motivations. When they don't do that, we're left wondering who these people are. And then it's impossible to care. And when it's impossible to care, then there's no reason to watch the show. Here are some things, off the top of my head, that are established, that the show writers decided to ignore in favor of plot (or, as the case may be, in favor of just maneuvering them into situations where the actors might show an expression that the showrunners enjoy seeing): Tyrion is smart and cunning. He also knows Cersei. He knows, better than anybody, that Cersei always looks at anything in terms of whether she could benefit by using it against her enemies. Tyrion and Cersei do not trust each other. At all. They have a LOOOONG history of not trusting each other. Arya is a human being, not a... pod person. The Faceless Men are a death cult, and they have secrets they'd be interested in keeping secret. Speaking of Arya and the Faceless Men... stab wounds to the gut take time to recover from, in this universe. Littlefinger is a cunning man, who is primarily motivated by three things: survival, lust for Catelyn/Sansa, and power/wealth. Everything he does is to further one or more of these things. He'd want Sansa to like him. And, as others mentioned, if he declares for the North, he'd want the North to be as strong as possible. After Sansa fled KL, Cersei wanted Sansa found, because she believed Sansa conspired to kill Joffrey. Anybody connected with Sansa would be under high suspicion. If Littlefinger had given Sansa to the Boltons, this would connect Littlefinger to Sansa. If Cersei had simply sent a raven to Winterfell to demand Sansa from the Boltons (who were in Winterfell because the Lannisters put them there), there would be a high risk that the Boltons would simply... comply. Then Cersei might have learned about Littlefinger's involvement with the Purple Wedding. LF would not have wanted that to happen. Not to mention, Sansa would end up right back in KL where she started, which would render the entire Purple Wedding pointless, from LF's POV. This isn't a complaint about the show being different from the books. This is a complaint that Littlefinger's actions made no sense, given his motivations. Jon is someone who cares very, very deeply about his vows. As others mentioned, Jon was at Hardhome, and saw what happened there, and as the foremost expert on White Walkers, he'd know that trying to abduct a wight would be suicide. These are just the examples I can think up at midnight on a work night. But it really all boils down to this: the writers don't think of the characters as autonomous people, so much as pawns to push around a board. The result of this is that, even the bulk of viewers who don't think about these things and primarily enjoy the spectacle, find that they don't care about the characters or the world, nearly as much as they did in S1. This is because, whether they're aware of it or not, their suspension of disbelief is constantly being broken. And while there are many subjective standards for what makes writing "good" vs. "bad," this isn't one of them. This is a serious (not tongue-in-cheek) fantasy show. Constantly breaking suspension of disbelief in a serious fantasy show is something that any good writer would strive to avoid. But the showrunners do not care. That's a problem.
  13. Katerine459

    [SPOILERS thru S7] Where did the show go wrong?

    ADWD Dany was frustrating, personally, but not out-of-character - her sole experience with ruling up until that point had been with people like the Dothraki, who are very straightforward, and not at all cunning. It was frustrating to the reader because we had come off of reading KL chapters, so we had long been immersed in the machinations of the court, so the idea of not seeing through what the slavers were doing was a little alien. But Dany hadn't been reading the books. She was new to machinations, and to ruling in general, and had a lack of good counselors. She relied on bad counsel (for lack of anything better) and fell for Hizdahr's schemes. I thought it was very in-keeping, and the only reason we expected otherwise was because we were used to people like Tyrion. In fact, this nicely emphasized just how much she needs Tyrion. (The show, not so much) As traumatized as Jon was by his brothers attacking him, he's far more traumatized by the Night King. He also still had the loyalty of Sam, and Edd, and would have felt the need to be loyal to his other friends' memories (Grenn, Pyp, LC Mormont). He'd also taken an oath, and while the oath said that "it shall not end until my death," and he had, technically, died... he'd been raised by Ned Stark. There's no way he wouldn't be contemptuous of technicalities like that. Especially when there was a war to fight, with the fate of the world at stake. Nobody was calling him "King in the North" at the time. He was still just Ned Stark's bastard... to the world, and to himself. His entire identity... all his pride and honor... was tied into being a Brother of the Night's Watch. It takes more than a trauma to make somebody like Jon turn his back on that. He was raised by Ned Stark, after all. Also, he had no way of knowing that he'd be any good at all to the war effort without being part of the Night's Watch - it would have looked to him like the only way to make any difference. Sansa doesn't bother me nearly as much as Arya. It's not so much that they fought, but how they fought. Arya starts by being suspicious of LF, so she follows him, and finds a note where Sansa pleads with Robb to bend the knee to Joffrey. She's upset. So far, so good. But the way she confronted Sansa just seemed off, and then there was the scene where Sansa found the faces. She's naturally shocked and confused, and Arya... what the hell was with that speech that Arya gave her? Why on earth would she say that? It's not anger, and it's not genuine (Arya never had the slightest wish to become Sansa)... why on earth wouldn't she just tell Sansa a bit about the Faceless Men, and about what she'd gone through? Other than plot. My issue with Arya goes back further, though. She'd joined a cult. One with some pretty significant secrets. They wouldn't just let her go. And I don't think she was just using them... she believed in the Many-faced God, and she believed in the work of the Faceless Men. She was hungry for a father figure at that point. She'd want to stay. Regardless of what the viewer would want... she'd want to stay. That's what I mean when I say that somebody's out of character. I don't mean that it isn't what I want... in fact, there are many things that I do, and do not, want to see, all the time... I do want to see them because they would be cool, or they would be good for my favorite characters, but I don't want to see them because they don't fit with what the character would do. I don't want to see Arya (in the books) continue to serve the Many-Faced God and become an antagonist (and likely a Walter White figure), but that is where she's likely heading, and it's more important for her to stay true to her own characterization than it is to get what the fans want. I was actually thinking of other things entirely. I think he'd be inclined to think the worst of Cersei, and so he wouldn't just jump to the idea of convincing her by showing her a wight. He'd know that she'd see it and, once the shock was over, she'd try to find a way to use it to her own advantage. (Which, I think, is demonizing her a little too much, and the fact that the writers had her actually do it made her rather one-dimensional, but that's how Tyrion would see her). And his trying to keep Jaime alive makes sense, especially given the lack of any rift (on his part) in the show, but Cersei? I'm specifically talking about my complaints, of course. There are a number of things that D&D had happen, that didn't happen in the books, that I have no complaints with, and that I even like. I know others have complaints about Tyrion freeing the dragons on his own, for example, but that made perfect sense for a pragmatist like Tyrion, who was probably also still retained a bit of his old death wish, and who was faced with the prospect of the dragons... his protector's greatest strength... wasting away. He'd also grown up wishing to someday see a dragon, and he'd studied the subject of them extensively. I also liked that Tyrion has actually met Dany in the show, even though... I thought she accepted Tyrion too easily in S6, mainly. He didn't really have to prove himself to her in any real way. She'd grown up fearing the Lannisters and running for her life from Robert, whom the Lannisters served.
  14. Katerine459

    [SPOILERS thru S7] Where did the show go wrong?

    Oh. Thanks - I'd forgotten all about that. Ok, that makes quite a bit more sense. Still quite a gamble on LF's part. Not that he's not a gambler, but still... he had no way of knowing that Cersei would just be satisfied with his version of events, and that she wouldn't send a raven to Winterfell demanding that Sansa be returned to KL... or that the Boltons wouldn't comply. Or worse, let Cersei know exactly how Sansa came to Winterfell in the first place. Or both. I think he viewed Cat as a prize. Which is in keeping, not only of his psychology, but also the social politics of the time. I also think he'd deluded himself into thinking that Cat secretly loved him, and would be free to love him openly if he got rid of Ned. You can see it in his face when he gave Cat Ned's bones; he was genuinely shocked when Cat started screaming and throwing things at him. Like it never occurred to him that she might actually be angry with him, or that she might actually have loved Ned. But the point is, whatever else they were, Cat, and later Sansa, were definitely more than just... pawns... to him. And he wasn't just "nice" to Sansa... he also taught her things. Demand by raven, for starters. I agree about the rest. Yes, most of the character stuff is what I fill into the blanks, or what comes from the books, not what's actually in the show. Basically, I think he was obsessed with Cat, and saw Ned as a rival for her affections, so he wanted to get rid of Ned, without Cat suspecting. First mission accomplished (almost). Then she died, so his next mission was to steal Sansa away for himself. And also to climb the ladder. So far, so good. But once he's got Sansa... that's when his actions start to make no sense whatsoever. And again, LF's just one example. Of many. Don't even get me started on Jon leaving the Night's Watch. Others have already said all there is to say about Sansa and Arya in S7 (the only words I can muster are, "what the hell?") And Tyrion, and Dany, and... yeah. *sigh*
  15. Katerine459

    [SPOILERS thru S7] Where did the show go wrong?

    That is in fact how it's supposed to work. That would be my point. It doesn't work when characters don't act consistently with their history and their motivations, in order to more easily further the plot, which is usually referred to as "plot driving the characters." That's what's bad. Well-written characters, like the ASOIAF characters, have minds of their own. If you try to write them doing something they wouldn't do in that situation, a good author can feel resistance to the idea, and will heed it. A good author will prioritize knowing the characters, and staying faithful to them (faithful in the sense that they don't write them doing something they wouldn't do, or saying something they wouldn't say), over plot. Not that plot doesn't matter, but it must evolve naturally from the characters doing what they would do. That's what it means to have the characters drive the plot. It sometimes means giving up on plots, or taking a longer road to them, if the characters don't want to comply right away. Characters come first. Always. I get the feeling this is all based on a misunderstanding. This is character-centric fiction, and you're right; that's subjective. What I'm talking about is the distinction between "characters driving the plot" (good) vs. "plot driving the characters" (bad), and the thought processes, on the part of the writer, that lead to each of those scenarios.
×