Sansa + Ned: What’s the Difference?

[Mladen]

There is the murder of Mycah though: her idealized version of Joffrey simply had to be torn apart after that. Ned didn't do anything after that too but Sansa goes further. Sansa chose to shrug it off and tranferred the blame to Arya and Mycah for the incident.

For me it's definitely Ned and Sansa's worst moment. They share it too.

In the end Sansa's core defence comes to: she was young, foolish, immature and naive and Ned was an adult so he should have known better. But it can't be denied that both were extremely callous about Mycah's life.

Yes, her idealized version should have been torn apart by this. And I agree, she is mistaken in the blaming Arya. Also, Sansa blamed Arya in one instance and we later see that she doesn't think that it was Arya's or Mycah's fault(although that comes later in ASoS) I don't think that either of them is callous about Mycah's life, for it was beyond them. Ned made here a huge mistake by allowing this infatuation grow uncontrollably. It is impressive who he is later opposed by Olenna Tyrell's philosophy later in ASoS. Simply, Ned put his honor and duty first, Olenna her family.

[butterbumps!]

Just so you know, Mourneblade, your continued insistence to project more negative readings on Sansa while making endless excuses for Ned is proving my point: readers do not use a consistent rubric for judging characters, and personal feeling, largely due to introductory bias, plays a greater role in how we see the characters than the reality of events.

Though I appreciate the fact that you took the time to look over the chapters, you're still jumping the gun by refusing to put your bias in check and really look at the text on this.

First she said she did not know in the trial, ie she lied. What she told Ned before was the truth, but Sansa's truth. During the attack she is blaming Arya, and after the attack, her first recollection of that event, she blames Arya in her thoughts, then blames her again when her and Arya fight about it later.

How can you maintain she would just tell the story exactly as it happened, without adding that she felt it was Arya's fault, in the telling. She honestly believes it, so it certainly would be part of the truth.

As to Joff being seen as a bully, this is a common thing for young teenage boys with power, they have to be taught that this is not acceptable behavior, but this one event in and of itself is not even remotely enough insight into his true nature to make the call to call off the betrothal

I'm becoming a bit impatient by your speculative projections on Sansa's thoughts here.

Here is the order of events I'm speaking to:
1. The Trident incident
2. Sansa tells Ned the truth. We know it's the truth, because Ned tells us it's the same story Arya told
3. Ned sends his men out to find Arya. You cannot seriously maintain that Ned had no time whatsoever to talk to Robert about this.
4. Arya tells her side of the story at the trial. Ned urges Sansa to speak since she's told him a version that corroborates Arya's. Do you seriously believe that if Sansa had told Ned a version of events that would have hurt Arya, that he would have spoken up and urged Sansa to come forward?
5. After the trial, Sansa blames Arya during a fight. She's trying to be hurtful. It's unfortunate and not very sympathetic, but it has nothing to do with the truth she told Ned, or what she actually believes happened.

Unless you want to maintain that Ned is so truly stupid that he'd call on Sansa (and yes, it was Ned who sent for Sansa initially, and spoke up to have her testify) to present a version of events that cast Arya in a bad light, then you really need to forgo this speculative nonsense. We know Sansa had told him the same thing Arya does at trial: "Ned had heard her version of the story the night Arya had vanished. He knew the truth." Ned wanted Sansa to testify because her version was the same Arya had told and would seemingly exonerate and corroborate her sister's account.

On the subject of Ned chalking Jof's behavior up to being a bully which is a "common thing:" you cannot have this both ways!

Either Jof is a terrible person, and both Sansa and Ned are wrong for not seeing this, or Jof's behavior is commonplace and not warning sign of danger. If you wish to write off Ned's lack of concern due to "boys will be boys" then you cannot keep disparaging Sansa as a "stupid Disney Princess" for continuing to seek his affection, because, you know, "boys will be boys."

You seem to see Ned's reaction to this as appeasement, but this is a very serious matter, Arya has assaulted the Prince. This is a crime punishable by death. You would think you would notice that undertone when the Kings Justice is introduced in the very same chapter. This is not a coincidence.

Yea, it's a serious matter, so why is the trial the first time Ned speaks to Robert about this? Why in heaven's name does Ned not try to nip this in the bud, and tell Robert the truth immediately? He could have easily defused the whole situation off the bat.

As to Lady, there is zero reason to dispatch servants to take Lady the night Sansa tells him the story. This is wishful thinking. It is even more wishful thinking to suggest that Ned can disobey the Queens order that the King lets stand. Once again you overlook that the Kings Justice has just been introduced. You are under the false impression that no one sees Lady's remains sent North. You make wonderful points throughout this thread that are well thought out, but are completely blind to the seriousness of these events and that attempting to send back Lady alive could have cost Ned his head.

You're really in denial about this. Ned could have sent Lady back:

He left the room with his eyes burning and his daughter’s wails echoing in his ears, and found the direwolf pup where they chained her. Ned sat beside her for a while. “Lady,” he said, tasting the name. He had never paid much attention to the names the children had picked, but looking at her now, he knew that Sansa had chosen well. She was the smallest of the litter, the prettiest, the most gentle and trusting. She looked at him with bright golden eyes, and he ruffled her thick grey fur.

Shortly, Jory brought him Ice.

When it was over, he said, “Choose four men and have them take the body north. Bury her at Winterfell.”

“All that way?” Jory said, astonished.

“All that way,” Ned affirmed. “The Lannister woman shall never have this skin.”

Here are the facts: Ned is alone with Lady and Jory. Ned sits with Lady for a little while. Ned kills her. He immediately tells Jory to get 4 men to take her entire body back to Winterfell, in defiance of Cersei's wish to have a pelt. The fact he's not giving her pelt is already in defiance of Cersei's wish. She's already going back in a box; she could have been sent in that box alive.

More to the point, though, the smart thing for Ned to have done would have been to suggest he sends Lady back as soon as the Trident incident occurred. It should have occurred to Ned that given how Nym attacked Jof (albeit for good reason, but attacked him nonetheless), that direwolves would be unwelcome at KL. Even if he didn't anticipate that Lady would be killed in Nym's stead, he ought to have seen that direwolves and court life do not mix, that Robert/ Cersei/ Jof would have serious problems with these wild animals in close quarters, and done the wolf a kindness and sent her to Winterfell.

It doesn't take a genius to realize that after one pet wolf bites the crown prince, other pet wolves will not be allowed around the prince henceforth.

In fact, this is something that Ned could have spun to nip the whole thing in the bud. Ned could have gone to Robert right after Sansa told him the truth, and used the fact he was preemptively sending Lady back as a bargaining chip. He could allow Robert to save face wrt Jof's behavior by admitting how dangerous the wolves were, and choosing to have them sent back-- that bringing them was a mistake.

[Cas Stark]

Ned "could" have sent Lady back alive, but this is not his nature, his nature is to tell the truth and do his duty. This is why he calls Sansa to tell the truth and why he is publicly aghast at Robert ordering Lady's death AND why he goes through with it. We only see him lie, engage in subterfuge a handful of times, and all with bad results. Jon Snow's parentage. The truth of what happened with Lyanna. Engaging LF to bribe the gold cloaks. Changing the exact wording on Robert's will. Confessing to treason.

He could have done it, but it was not in his character to do it. He should most certainly have sent his daughters back to WF under whatever pretense he could come up with and this he could have done honorably and probably without too much problem....I don't see how this equates to anything with Sansa though....and of course if he had done that, then half the story is gone. LOL.

[butterbumps!]

Ned "could" have sent Lady back alive, but this is not his nature, his nature is to tell the truth and do his duty. This is why he calls Sansa to tell the truth and why he is publicly aghast at Robert ordering Lady's death AND why he goes through with it. We only see him lie, engage in subterfuge a handful of times, and all with bad results. Jon Snow's parentage. The truth of what happened with Lyanna. Engaging LF to bribe the gold cloaks. Changing the exact wording on Robert's will. Confessing to treason.

He could have done it, but it was not in his character to do it. He should most certainly have sent his daughters back to WF under whatever pretense he could come up with and this he could have done honorably and probably without too much problem....I don't see how this equates to anything with Sansa though....and of course if he had done that, then half the story is gone. LOL.

I wrote down the parallel actions pretty thoroughly in the OP.

What you wrote here-- that it's not in Ned's nature to think of sending Lady back and the like-- is precisely my point.

Ned performs actions (and fails to perform others) that hurt or otherwise put his family in danger. He sides with his King over his daughters. He doesn't think about the consequences of bringing his daughters to this environment. He secures Cersei's kids' safety before securing his own. But "it's ok" that he does these things because "it's not in his nature" to do otherwise.

Look, I'm not asking anyone to like Sansa. I'm not even trying to exonerate her from anything here. And I'm not trying to condemn Ned for these things I've pointed out.

What I am doing is appealing to read this all more honestly-- that is, to become mindful of our biases. You, and others-- hell, even myself-- give Ned numerous passes for all of these actions (i.e. "it's not in his nature"), while simultaneously condemning Sansa for similar things (she's stupid, she should have known better than to go to Cersei, she should have told the truth at the trial, and so forth).

I'm not even trying to say that one is more guilty of anything than the other. I'm saying that they do nearly the exact same things in terms of unwittingly acting against their family's interests for similar reasons (not thinking through the consequences), and having similar motives (keeping peace, hamfisted diplomacy attempts, a sense of honor and duty). I'm saying that condemning Sansa for these things while exonerating and excusing Ned is a double standard, and I'm locating the source of this double standard (or inconsistent rubric) as the way we're introduced to them variously.

[Cas Stark]

They do not have similar motives, which is why the argument to me is fundamentally flawed. Sansa's motives are entirely selfish, we know what her motives are because we have her POV. She doesn't act the way she does out of a sense of duty or honor, but for selfish reasons of thinking herself in love with the prince and wanting to marry him. All of her negative actions in GOT are done for personal, selfish reasons to achieve her own desire.

While it is true that Ned does act against the interest of his family by not recognizing the danger he's put his daughters in, he is not doing this from selfishness or a desire for anything for himself, but out of his sense of duty. So, I don't agree with the parallel here or that which is drawn in the OP.

[Sansa_Stark]

Let's see.

Sansa knew Joff slashed his sword at Arya.

Sansa knew Jaime was involved with some of Ned's men dying

Sansa knew Lady's death was on Cersei

Sansa may or may not have known Jaime broke her father's leg(I don't recall her ever thinking it)

Sansa may or may not have known that the Lannisters started attacking some parts of the riverlands(she may have just attributed it to Gregor that's what she thinks afterwards)

Just saying.

The first 3 are definite. The 2nd two are a bit more vague.

[Mladen]

snip

OK, just answer me this, can sense of honor and duty be selfish? It's not like those words are complete opposites. If one acts on the sense of honor not understanding or even not caring for the ill they are causing around themselves, can we say that act is selfish? When you put your own sentiment in front of lives of those you love, that isn't selfish?

[butterbumps!]

They do not have similar motives, which is why the argument to me is fundamentally flawed. Sansa's motives are entirely selfish, we know what her motives are because we have her POV. She doesn't act the way she does out of a sense of duty or honor, but for selfish reasons of thinking herself in love with the prince and wanting to marry him. All of her negative actions in GOT are done for personal, selfish reasons to achieve her own desire.

Even if they did not have the same motives, the fact that they both unwittingly go against their own family with hamfisted diplomacy IS the same. Recognizing that they both do this is critical. Neither of them wants to hurt their family, yet they make moves that unintentionally put their family in danger (Ned more so). I hope you're not contesting that aspect.

In particular, despite the fact that both unintentionally work against their family's interests (again, Ned does this more so-- the only time Sansa does this is when she goes to Cersei), Sansa is called "disloyal" and "betrayer" for it, while no such accusation is made of Ned. Even if their motives are not the same, they are both acting in ways that unintentionally cause their family harm. Meaning, neither has the intention of siding against their own family.

Now, the truth of the matter is that Sansa's desires happen to align with her duty. NED-- her father-- is the one who arranged this marriage to Jof. As his daughter, she has a duty to honor this. The fact that Ned never breaks off the betrothal until the 11th hour means that becoming Jof's wife and pleasing him is her duty. She was to marry him whether she wanted to or not. She overlooks his transgression at the Trident because A. he frequently charms her before and after and B. marrying Joffrey is her father's instruction!

Let's not forget that Ned hasn't made the broken betrothal official, so Ned is arguably in violation of his superior (the king) by secretly telling her the marriage is off. Having been betrothed to Robert's family, and being as how the king is her father's boss, Sansa's not merely a representative of the Stark clan, but the Baratheon one as well-- she's quite literally stuck in the middle on this.

While it is true that Ned does act against the interest of his family by not recognizing the danger he's put his daughters in, he is not doing this from selfishness or a desire for anything for himself, but out of his sense of duty. So, I don't agree with the parallel here or that which is drawn in the OP.

Their motives don't actually matter, but as it happens, they are similar.

The fact that they both unintentionally act against their family's interest is what matters. Neither wants to hurt their own family, but they do. Meaning, their motives are not about siding against their own family.

When you control for life and political experience, it strikes me as remarkably ridiculous to berate Sansa for these parallels while excusing Ned, the guy who's been a lord for 17 years. I'm not sure that a strict adherence to honor/ duty is all that much more noble than an 11 year old's firm belief in true love (they are both ideals, after all).

Sansa has a selfish investment in going to Cersei-- she "loves" Jof and wants to be his wife. But this investment was imposed on her in the first place from her father, who, despite the warning signs, didn't even contemplate breaking the betrothal until it was too late. Until that betrothal is officially broken, it is her duty to please Joffrey and to get him to love her too. She cannot refuse to wed him.

[King Brandon Ice Eyes]

Yes, her idealized version should have been torn apart by this. And I agree, she is mistaken in the blaming Arya. Also, Sansa blamed Arya in one instance and we later see that she doesn't think that it was Arya's or Mycah's fault(although that comes later in ASoS) I don't think that either of them is callous about Mycah's life, for it was beyond them. Ned made here a huge mistake by allowing this infatuation grow uncontrollably. It is impressive who he is later opposed by Olenna Tyrell's philosophy later in ASoS. Simply, Ned put his honor and duty first, Olenna her family.

In the end they couldn't have averted it even if they wanted, I agree. But Sansa should have known that if she didn't say the truth his life would be in danger. What if Cersei had waited to hear both versions of the story before deciding if the boy should be executed (as the law dictates, there should be a trial). It's an entirely believable possibility to be considered by a person who believed Cersei was a good, fair queen.

And I think both Ned and Sansa were callous about his death. The death of a wolf hurt them more than the death of a human being. Yes, they didn't know the boy and the wolf was a dear pet but still, his murder was just an inconvenience for both of them.

She made a huge mistake herself in feeling an uncontrollable infatuation for a boy she knew for a fact was a bully and a liar. To be fair neither of them knew Joffrey would be capable of hurting her as he was pleasant to her most of the time. The extent of his sadism was yet to be revealed. So Ned didn't think he was putting her safety in danger by marrying her to Joffrey. In the end though I agree he was negligent but Sansa convinced herself that Joffrey was a great person after a innocent boy was killed because of his lies. What would you do in Ned's place? What could he have said to prove the truth to her when she had already seen it with her own eyes?

And we know what Olenna philosophy made her to do: murder a person and shed the blame on innocent Sansa and Tyrion. I would choose Ned any time. Ned screwed up, she is a criminal.

[Cas Stark]

Again, it's irrelevant what Sansa can and can't refuse to do. We know from her POV what she wants to do and why. So we know that she is not in love with Joff to please her father, do her duty or help he family, but for herself.

She also knows that multiple actions she is taking are absolutely against the interests of her family, she knows why her father has called her to tell what happened and that when she lies this is against the interests of her family, she knows again that when she goes to Cersei, against the express statement of her father to tell no one, that she is being disloyal. I don't see where the idea that she thinks she is engaging in diplomacy comes from, I skimmed her POVs and if that is in there I missed it, it seems very clear she goes to the queen so that her father will be prevented from taking her back to WF and that she can still marry Joff. Nothing about fixing some misunderstanding or engaging in diplomacy.

The difference between Ned and Sansa is that Ned wrongly believes he can still protect the family and it's interest, despite the dangerous situation he has put them in, Sansa is not at any time attempting to protect the family, but to achieve her personal desire. Of course it isn't her place to protect the family, this is her father's role, and he fails to judge correctly the situation, does not get his daughter's out in time...of course Sansa helps this fail...but at the time, he believes he has the power to protect and safeguard them. So, again, huge difference in the mindset and reasons for their actions. It's the same reason he doesn't immediately break off the engagement w/Joff. Why would he? He doesn't want to do this until he's got the girls out because he knows this will create a huge rift and it isn't like they were going to be married any time soon, so he believes he has time and he did.

I just think these parallels are an overreach. Yes, they both act against the interests of their family and do things that put their family and themselves in danger, but the reasons and motivations and expectations are totally different. In my opinion.

[Mladen]

She made a huge mistake herself in feeling an uncontrollable infatuation for a boy she knew for a fact was a bully and a liar. To be fair neither of them knew Joffrey would be capable of hurting her as he was pleasant to her most of the time. The extent of his sadism was yet to be revealed. So Ned didn't think he was putting her safety in danger by marrying her to Joffrey. In the end though I agree he was negligent but Sansa convinced herself that Joffrey was a great person after a innocent boy was killed because of his lies. What would you do in Ned's place? What could he have said to prove the truth to her when she had already seen it with her own eyes?

And we know what Olenna philosophy made her to do: murder a person and shed the blame on innocent Sansa and Tyrion. I would choose Ned any time. Ned screwed up, she is a criminal.

Yes, but she is a 11 year-old girl. It is natural to feel uncontrollable infatuation. We have all felt that way once. But it was on Ned to put an end to it. As an adult, he should have been more careful about his daughters. He should have talked to her, right after the incident, and explain her everything if he sees that girl is in love. Ned should have paid more attention to his girls. Ned had enough to send the girls back to Winterfell in any occasion, even when Cat arrived and he found out about Bran's assassination, he should have gone to the King, invent something, use Cat's grief or whatever and send them to Winterfell. I honestly even doubt he should have had to go to Robert and explain why he sent the girls back home.

Lastly, about Olenna. Yes, we all want to be Ned, honorable to the point where we endanger our family, but I think what Olenna did is much relatable. She fought for her family, never for a single second allowed anything else to change priorities. First comes family, then everything else. She proved that when she summoned Sansa, when she poisoned Joffrey. Also, have in mind that Cersei was the one who accused Tyrion, not Olenna. Cersei did Olenna's work...

[butterbumps!]

Again, it's irrelevant what Sansa can and can't refuse to do. We know from her POV what she wants to do and why. So we know that she is not in love with Joff to please her father, do her duty or help he family, but for herself.

Sansa points out that she wants to be a good wife to Jof (i.e. perform her duty) when Ned tells her the marriage is off.

No one's denying that Sansa wants to marry Jof. But the fact is that NED put this on the table in the first place. Sansa has to be in love with Jof and him with her because they are betrothed.

She also knows that multiple actions she is taking are absolutely against the interests of her family, she knows why her father has called her to tell what happened and that when she lies this is against the interests of her family, she knows again that when she goes to Cersei, against the express statement of her father to tell no one, that she is being disloyal. I don't see where the idea that she thinks she is engaging in diplomacy comes from, I skimmed her POVs and if that is in there I missed it, it seems very clear she goes to the queen so that her father will be prevented from taking her back to WF and that she can still marry Joff. Nothing about fixing some misunderstanding or engaging in diplomacy.

Where are you even getting this from? Who's going against whose interests here? It's remarkably insensitive of Ned to ask his daughter to testify against her future husband. What an incredibly stupid idea that was on his part. Good lord. How does Sansa testify against Jof without severe blowback due to the betrothal, which places Sansa squarely between Stark and Baratheon?

Sansa is not going to Cersei out of "disloyalty" to her father, and to maintain this is a criminally biased reading. Sansa thinks that there's some misunderstanding and that Ned's in violation of the Baratheons:

She was the good girl, the obedient girl, but she had felt as wicked as Arya that morning, sneaking away from Septa Mordane, defying her lord father. She had never done anything so willful before, and she would never have done it then if she hadn’t loved Joffrey as much as she did. “He was going to take me back to Winterfell and marry me to some hedge knight, even though it was Joff I wanted. I told him, but he wouldn’t listen.” The king had been her last hope. The king could command Father to let her stay in King’s Landing and marry Prince Joffrey, Sansa knew he could, but the king had always frightened her.

She didn't understand why her father was sending her back-- he did not explain the situation. It's an act of simple disobedience-- she thought Ned's curt explanation was BS, and there was some way to fix it. She doesn't think Ned has the authority to send her back-- that is, she doesn't think Ned's made it known that he's called off the marriage, and is therefore in violation.

She does state her motive as "true love," and certainly, she has personal reasons for wanting to stay. It's not just Joffrey, but the fact that KL is way more exciting than Winterfell. She's losing not just Jof but what seems like her entire future. (and as an aside, she stresses the "true love" part because she's talking to Cersei at the moment)

But no where in her thoughts does Sansa express any wish to harm her father or her family. She doesn't believe the BS he told her and she takes matters into her own hands.

As an aside, I find it curious when those who point to this as an act of "betrayal" also accuse Sansa of being the "passive one." She's trying to take her own future in her hands since she wasn't given any explanation on why her dreams were shattered.

The difference between Ned and Sansa is that Ned wrongly believes he can still protect the family and it's interest, despite the dangerous situation he has put them in, Sansa is not at any time attempting to protect the family, but to achieve her personal desire. Of course it isn't her place to protect the family, this is her father's role, and he fails to judge correctly the situation, does not get his daughter's out in time...of course Sansa helps this fail...but at the time, he believes he has the power to protect and safeguard them. So, again, huge difference in the mindset and reasons for their actions. It's the same reason he doesn't immediately break off the engagement w/Joff. Why would he? He doesn't want to do this until he's got the girls out because he knows this will create a huge rift and it isn't like they were going to be married any time soon, so he believes he has time and he did.

I just think these parallels are an overreach. Yes, they both act against the interests of their family and do things that put their family and themselves in danger, but the reasons and motivations and expectations are totally different. In my opinion.

No, Ned's thoughts do not reveal that his actions presuppose he's working in his family's interests. Ned thinks remarkably little about the effects of his actions on his family. This is something you are reading into his motives. Returning his daughters to Winterfell after the Trident would not have caused a huge rift. He needn't even call off the betrothal-- just said it would go more smoothly to send for them when they're settled in KL to defuse the situation.

Do you realize that no one is looking out for Sansa's interests in all of this? Why is it so contemptible that Sansa is motivated by looking out for herself (especially given that she's now negotiating the space between Stark and Baratheon), and especially in light of having the duty of marrying Jof imposed on her by her father? Sansa isn't treated to the one-on-one comfort sessions Arya is. She's left to navigate the Stark-Baratheon gap largely on her own. Ned really leaves her hanging. No one will speak on her behalf except for herself. Why is this so contemptible?

I agree that Sansa has much self interest in going to Cersei, but you can't honestly maintain that if Ned levelled with her, explaining the situation, and if Sansa knew Ned's life would be jeopardized by her appeal, that she'd go through with it anyway. It's clear she thought it was some silly misunderstanding that could be easily remedied. She doesn't think there's any harm in going to the King/ Queen on this. That should be clear. And until that betrothal is officially broken, she's still navigating the space between Stark-Baratheon.

[King Brandon Ice Eyes]

Yes, but she is a 11 year-old girl. It is natural to feel uncontrollable infatuation. We have all felt that way once.

Infatuation, yes. But uncontrollable? I have a hard time believing teenagers can actually feel so blind and dellusional about their first "love" in real life. I had my crushes when I was a kid, I suffered when they didn't return my affections, but I never felt uncontrollable infatuation. Many of my friends say the same. It's relatively intense but it never felt like Romeo and Juliet. But that is not an argument. Apparently this is common behavior, everyone says so, so the problem must be with me. But I still held accountable people like Dany (Drogo) and Jaime for falling in love with horrible people so Sansa has a little blame in my book as well.

Lastly, about Olenna. Yes, we all want to be Ned, honorable to the point where we endanger our family, but I think what Olenna did is much relatable. She fought for her family, never for a single second allowed anything else to change priorities. First comes family, then everything else. She proved that when she summoned Sansa, when she poisoned Joffrey. Also, have in mind that Cersei was the one who accused Tyrion, not Olenna. Cersei did Olenna's work...

That's because she doesn't display any morality. My impression is that she is amoral, just like Jaime was. I don't think pushing Bran out of the window was relatable neither her actions in the Purple Wedding. Even sociopaths can love a few people and put their needs above everyone else.

No, few people can be like Ned, that is why he is more admirable despite his faults. In the end, he actually did put his family first. You think it's too late but that is what is tragic about him IMO. His are the actions of a good man: conflicted, constantly choosing what is right or not, trying to act with honesty and, yes, committing mistakes. Olenna is basically: "I will protect my family, if anyone dies because of it, fuck it."

She is a good judge of character and very smart and observant. She knew Cersei would blame Tyrion and indirectly Sansa. Anyway, it doesn't matter: someone had to be blamed and she was OK with it, cracking jokes and everything.

[Cas Stark]

But, you see it is not at all clear to me that she thought it was a silly misunderstanding. The excerpt you just posted has nothing at all in there about a misunderstanding that Sansa wants to fix, nothing. She wants to marry Joff and loves him and her father won't listen. That's not a misunderstanding between Stark and Baratheon that is a spoiled teenager girl who isn't getting her way.

Nobody thinks she expects going to the queen will harm her father, she expects the queen will let her stay in KL and marry Joff. No one is contesting that she has no idea what she is really doing at the time when she divulges her father's plans. It is an opinion as to whether she should have known there was more risk here than she did, but I don't think anyone thinks Sansa ever anticipated the outcome. But, that doesn't make it not disloyal or acting against the interest of her family.

One thing that is rarely discussed is the why of Ned having a seemingly very different relationship with his younger daughter, who he takes aside, and gives a very honest heart to heart talk...which he never does with Sansa. He doesn't seem as able to relate to her as he does with Arya.

[butterbumps!]

But, you see it is not at all clear to me that she thought it was a silly misunderstanding. The excerpt you just posted has nothing at all in there about a misunderstanding that Sansa wants to fix, nothing. She wants to marry Joff and loves him and her father won't listen. That's not a misunderstanding between Stark and Baratheon that is a spoiled teenager girl who isn't getting her way.

You pointed out that Ned told them to keep this a secret, right? As in, Ned is going against the express wishes of the king and queen (his employers) by surreptitiously calling off the betrothal, and the only explanation he gives is that Joffrey isn't as good as Sansa thinks he is. Ned's trite explanation seems like a weak excuse.

Unless you think that Sansa was aware of everything going on causing Stark-Baratheon problems, that Cersei's an enemy, and that she's purposely trying help her family's enemies, what exactly do you think she's doing by trying to intervene if not clear up whatever it is that compelled Ned to break off the betrothal secretly? She's being an intermediary.

Nobody thinks she expects going to the queen will harm her father, she expects the queen will let her stay in KL and marry Joff. No one is contesting that she has no idea what she is really doing at the time when she divulges her father's plans. It is an opinion as to whether she should have known there was more risk here than she did, but I don't think anyone thinks Sansa ever anticipated the outcome. But, that doesn't make it not disloyal or acting against the interest of her family.

If you think that Sansa had no idea of the fall-out from this, and she was not trying to undermine her family, then we agree. But if you want to call Sansa "disloyal" for this, then you must also call Ned "disloyal" for appealing to Cersei before securing his own kids, given that this act went expressly against the interests of the Starks.

The consistent rubric is what I'm getting at here. If the definition of "disloyal" and "betrayal" covers all actions that go against the interests of one's organization, regardless of intentionality, then Ned must also be included for actions made that go against his family's interests.

[The Ned's Little Girl]

Again, it's irrelevant what Sansa can and can't refuse to do. We know from her POV what she wants to do and why. So we know that she is not in love with Joff to please her father, do her duty or help he family, but for herself.

{snipped the rest}

I'm sorry, but this is just wrong. It's incredibly relevant what Sansa can and cannot do. A child in Westerosi society is not a free agent, and a female child is even less of a free agent.

1) Sansa's father arranged her betrothal to the Crown Prince. He did not consult with her or ask her in any way. Her duty binds her to her father's will in all ways until she is married, then it is her husband's authority which she must obey. That is the way of the society into which she was born and Sansa was hopelessly well-trained to obey these dictates.

2) The socially-imposed duty of a noble child is to marry into the highest status possible. This is the duty and requirement made of noble children: to enhance the status of their birth family by marrying well. Again, Sansa was hopelessly well-trained to seek out and aspire to exactly that status enhancement.

2a) The only avenue for female children to enhance their family's (and their own) status is by advantageous marriage. Men can do so by marriage as well as by being great knights or generals or holding some prestigious royal appointment.

Since Sansa has no choice in the matter and also has been reared to believe that she is fulfilling her highest duty, it certainly behooves her to make the best of it. She's 11 years old and is expected to spend the rest of her life married to a person she just met. Of course, she's going to make herself "fall in love" with him. It is required of her that she please him. It's required by her family and by her entire social caste. (BTW, it's not required of him that he please her.)

I'm flabbergasted that anyone can read of Sansa's infatuation and think it's only selfishness. She's only doing what she as been trained from birth to do (and in fact, it is the only thing she as been trained from birth to do).

[Mourneblade]

Just so you know, Mourneblade, your continued insistence to project more negative readings on Sansa while making endless excuses for Ned is proving my point: readers do not use a consistent rubric for judging characters, and personal feeling, largely due to introductory bias, plays a greater role in how we see the characters than the reality of events.

Though I appreciate the fact that you took the time to look over the chapters, you're still jumping the gun by refusing to put your bias in check and really look at the text on this.

I'm becoming a bit impatient by your speculative projections on Sansa's thoughts here.

Here is the order of events I'm speaking to:

1. The Trident incident

2. Sansa tells Ned the truth. We know it's the truth, because Ned tells us it's the same story Arya told

3. Ned sends his men out to find Arya. You cannot seriously maintain that Ned had no time whatsoever to talk to Robert about this.

4. Arya tells her side of the story at the trial. Ned urges Sansa to speak since she's told him a version that corroborates Arya's. Do you seriously believe that if Sansa had told Ned a version of events that would have hurt Arya, that he would have spoken up and urged Sansa to come forward?

5. After the trial, Sansa blames Arya during a fight. She's trying to be hurtful. It's unfortunate and not very sympathetic, but it has nothing to do with the truth she told Ned, or what she actually believes happened.

Unless you want to maintain that Ned is so truly stupid that he'd call on Sansa (and yes, it was Ned who sent for Sansa initially, and spoke up to have her testify) to present a version of events that cast Arya in a bad light, then you really need to forgo this speculative nonsense. We know Sansa had told him the same thing Arya does at trial: "Ned had heard her version of the story the night Arya had vanished. He knew the truth." Ned wanted Sansa to testify because her version was the same Arya had told and would seemingly exonerate and corroborate her sister's account.

First off I am not judging Sansa in this instance with any bias, and only including her own thoughts.

She blames Arya during the incident. Upon reflection at the hands tourney, she blames Arya again in her own thoughts as well as Cercei. Then she blames Arya in their fight. This is 3 separate instances where she sees and reflects that this is Arya's fault. This is not projection, assumption, or bias, these are Sansa's own thoughts and statements and is printed fact. She does not see fault in Joff during any of these thoughts or statements either. Once again, this is not bias, or assumption, she does not even consider Joff in her own thoughts at the hands tourney.

Now put yourself in Ned's shoes here. Sansa comes to you and tells you the whole story, true from her own point of view. Which we clearly have examples of. Ned is going to be skeptical about Sansa blaming Arya, she always does, we have clear example of this, so he, like any other decent parent, is going to try and read between the lines here.

She tells him about the wine,

She tells him about Ayra and the butcher boy stick fighting

She tells him about the butcherboy hitting Arya on the hand.

She tells him what Joff says to the butcherboy

She tells him about Joff punishing the butcherboy for hitting Arya, by cutting his face.

She tells him that Arya hits Joff in the back of the head with a broom handle so hard it draws blood

She tells him that Joff then tries to attack Arya with a real sword though and that the butcherboy runs off.

She tells him Nymeria came in and Bit Joffs hand and he drops his sword.

She tells him Arya picks up Joffs sword and tosses it into the Trident. Then runs off with Nymeria.

Now you just heard this. As a parent you immediately seize on this thought "OMG Arya has assaulted the Prince""and then and her Wolf bit him too" "We need to find Arya and get her side of this story ASAP"

Ned does not go to Robert because Ned does not have all the facts. Ned throughout the entire story never jumps to conclusions on any situation without gathering all the information he can, from Lysa's Letter, to this, to going to the queen about the incest, to stepping down as hand.

This is a dangerous situation, he cannot act rash, but needs to find Arya. Both Sansa's story and Joff's story agree that Arya attacked Joff, that Nymeria bit Joff, and Arya tossed his sword into the Trident. Arya's could lose her life. It is my opinion he shared some or all of his concern with Sansa it would explain her actions in a much more positive and realistic light.

Now when Arya is found and brought before the King, Ned feels Sansa will tell the truth, without blaming Arya for the whole mess I might add.

Now let me be clear. Both Arya's and Sansa's versions are BAD for Arya, just no where near as bad as Joff's story.

When Sansa hears the King's speach about Truth and Lies, she panics, and here is why in my opinion.

She loves Joff but knows his version is not the truth. She might not understand why he lied, but she does agree it was Arya's fault, which explains her still being blind to him.

She believes it to be Arya's fault, but Arya is her sister and she loves her sister.

She is afraid that if she tells the whole truth from her point of view, Her sister could be executed, I am certain her encounter will Ser Ilynn Payne is in her mind at this moment, and she would also be calling the Prince a liar as well.

This is a Lose Lose for Sansa and it makes perfect, and completely forgivable, sense that she would answer the way she does.

The way she interprets this being Arya's fault, in multiple settings and times, is what makes Sansa look bad to the readers, That being said, digging deeper, I interpret her choice now to say "I don't know" in consideration of both Joff, and Arya.

I'll address the other part of your statement in my next post.

[butterbumps!]

I'm flabbergasted that anyone can read of Sansa's infatuation and think it's only selfishness. She's only doing what she as been trained from birth to do (and in fact, it is the only thing she as been trained from birth to do).

I agree, but I think it might be an issue of perspectival bias again. From many of the posts, I think there's a tendency to read Ned's actions with the presupposition that they are intended to protect his family's interests, despite such thoughts being a rarity in his POV. Adjacently, I think there's a tendency to take Sansa's thoughts at face value, without framing them from the perspective that her "love" of Joffrey presupposes the fact she has a duty to love him. I tend to think both are embedded in their actions-- Ned does want what's best for his family, and Sansa loves Jof because it's her duty to do so.

Both are equally guilty of unintentionally undermining their family. In terms of motive, neither has had the intention of hurting their side.

[ShadowCat Rivers]

One thing that is rarely discussed is the why of Ned having a seemingly very different relationship with his younger daughter, who he takes aside, and gives a very honest heart to heart talk...which he never does with Sansa. He doesn't seem as able to relate to her as he does with Arya.

I believe that Ned and Arya's "the pack survives" talk would never have happened if Arya wasn't the "difficult child". This kind of parenting was not the norm, parants gave istructions and children were supposed to obey without much or any questioning. I think it is quite clear that the conversation was a last resort when all other forms of discipline that the Septa had tried, had all failed.

Sansa, in this too, falls victim to her own "good girl" attitude. She doesn't -seemingly- pose any problem that needs to be dealt. Therefore, no talk and no explanation. Also, Ned is the first "victim" of underestimating Sansa. She's supposed to be the "good girl", the non-willful, the one who will meekly obey. It sets a certain pattern for Sansa's story. This is the same misjudgement that all her captors, without exception, will make regarding Sansa.

edited for grammar

[Cas Stark]

You pointed out that Ned told them to keep this a secret, right? As in, Ned is going against the express wishes of the king and queen (his employers) by surreptitiously calling off the betrothal, and the only explanation he gives is that Joffrey isn't as good as Sansa thinks he is. Ned's trite explanation seems like a weak excuse.

Unless you think that Sansa was aware of everything going on causing Stark-Baratheon problems, that Cersei's an enemy, and that she's purposely trying help her family's enemies, what exactly do you think she's doing by trying to intervene if not clear up whatever it is that compelled Ned to break off the betrothal secretly? She's being an intermediary.

If you think that Sansa had no idea of the fall-out from this, and she was not trying to undermine her family, then we agree. But if you want to call Sansa "disloyal" for this, then you must also call Ned "disloyal" for appealing to Cersei before securing his own kids, given that this act went expressly against the interests of the Starks.

The consistent rubric is what I'm getting at here. If the definition of "disloyal" and "betrayal" covers all actions that go against the interests of one's organization, regardless of intentionality, then Ned must also be included for actions made that go against his family's interests.

You are reading something into the text that is not there. So when you get all irate at people not seeing this concept of Sansa thinking she's exercising diplomacy and trying to bridge some gap and fix a misunderstanding, it isn't really fair, because this is not in the text, the text spells out something to me very different.

But, here, let me give you a Sansa defense that I rarely see. It's not exactly in the text either, LOL, but it seems fairly logical to me. She sees Cersei and Joff as BARATHEONS. The reader, her father, and most other characters think of Cersei especially as a Lannister, as she is, through and through. But, why would Sansa have this view of her? She's Bob's wife, Bob Baratheon, her father's best friend, duel hero of RR. Sansa's only real life model of the wife of a high lord is her own mother, Cat STARK, who is seen and referred to by reader and character alike as a Stark and could not be more loyal to House Stark if the wolf blood itself flowed through her veins. So, why would Sansa think that Cersei Baratheon, wife of her own father's best friend, would be bad or out to harm her father or the king? It would be almost unfathomable to her, especially coupled with her dreamy fairlytale outlook and tendency to go with surface conclusions. Same for Joffrey "Baratheon" he is her father's best friend's son, and he's handsome. This is the best excuse for why she downplays all of their BS. It is Jamie LANNISTER who attacks her father, and so, despite how wrong this is you could see that she would make a distinction here. Cersei and Joff are Baratheons, related by blood and marriage to Bob. Jamie is a Lannister. It's still sort of weak, considering that her siblings see through all of this, but it's much less weak than some super speculative reading that despite her POV saying exactly what she thinks and why she does what she does....that she's doing it for some other, better sounding reason.

You could apply this same reasoning to the scene at the Trident. Her father is totally keyed into "Lannister men"...maybe Sansa should have been, or not, because when push comes to shove they're all Bob's men...men of her father's best friend, so her under appreciating the situation could be seen as not as grievous a sin because she doesn't see the power dynamics underneath it all. She sees Cersei Baratheon, Bob Baratheon, and Joff Baratheon....she's thinking, how bad can this get? Not that bad. But, she's wrong.