FakeJaqenH'ghar Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 I probably could have posted this somewhere else but due to where I am in the series, I figured I might as well post it here. After watching Episode 10 and a HBO commentary from David & Dan about the events in the Season Four Finale, it seems as though the show writers feel Ned Stark died FOR Stannis. They said as much in the commentary reviewing the episode and went to the extent of writing it onto the screen when Jon tells Stannis something along the lines of, "I know who you are, my father died for you". I get that Ned died knowing the "secrets" Stannis and Jon Arryn knew. I believe Ned (at least in the HBO series) had a part in supporting Stannis in his rightful claim to the throne. But I just don't feel like he actually died FOR Stannis. In the end, Ned throws away what he believes to be true in hopes of gaining refuge on the Wall. It's Joffrey's ruthlessness and tyrannical behavior that caused Ned's death, not an unwavering defense of Stannis. Nitpicky, I know...but I just wanted to see how you all interpret it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pengwin7 Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Interesting.I'm actually doing a re-watch on the TV shows and watching commentary too.I've got discs 4 (ep7&8) and 5 (ep9&10) coming this weekend... so I'll give a watch and tell you my interpretation. re: Stannis & Arryn and the secret.Personally, I think what they found out about true family lineage ("Seed is strong") goes much deeper than just the Lannister twins incest.I actually think this (children not actually being the spawn of the assumed parents) is going to be revealed in multiple people when it is all said & done.Farther than just Jon Snow. (my own theories)After all - I think there are lines in the book/show where people like LF & Varys quote about the obvious-ness of the yellow-haired "Baratheon" children.So I'm not sure how big of a secret it was to the intelligent Westeros population. (maybe more that they are all just smart enough to keep quiet... and Arryn/Stark were not.)"The Seed is Strong". Killing of a "main" character is a great, great, great way to kick off a deeper story, and bring several other characters to the forefront of the story... equally.Anyways - that (I believe) is GRRM's tactical reason in the story for offing the "main character"... to develop the overall depths of others as peers/equals/fighting towards same end goal. But back to the point-in-hand,Eddard was at Joff/Cersei's mercy with his two daughters being in the hold of King's Landing.A father makes this sacrifice (for his daughters/family).Once Eddard is dead, the revenge is now owed upon the Lannisters - and likely no further of the Stark family may be killed... or there would be global revolt against the King. I believe the producers are simply trying to convey that Eddard believed that the throne should go to the rightful king.But ultimately, his actions were his actions for the best result for his family.My 2 cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FakeJaqenH'ghar Posted June 18, 2014 Author Share Posted June 18, 2014 Agreed. And the producers might just be reinforcing that Ned believed the throne should go to the rightful king (Stannis) after King Robert's death. Its the word selection they used, particularly for, that got my attention. Ned dying for Stannis makes it seem, to me, like Ned put his life on the line to get Stannis his throne. It has been a while since I read book one, and I have forgotten the extent of Ned and Stannis' interaction, particularly if Ned attempted to get Stannis to take back the throne (and to what degree). In my mind, Ned ultimately deviated from a belief in Stannis' right to the throne in order to save his life and family. While this belief did get him into trouble to begin with, I don't feel like it was his ultimate undoing. I give that honor to Joffrey, who denied Ned the chance to walk away with his head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince of the North Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Killing of a "main" character is a great, great, great way to kick off a deeper story, and bring several other characters to the forefront of the story... equally. Anyways - that (I believe) is GRRM's tactical reason in the story for offing the "main character"... to develop the overall depths of others as peers/equals/fighting towards same end goal. I agree. Ned died because he was betrayed multiple times. It's as simple as that. However, I remember thinking how brilliant killing the character was the very first time I read it. That was the signal that the story was never really going to be about him. He was never really the main protagonist. That was always meant to be the next generation (i.e. his kids, Jon, Dany, etc.) And he absolutely had to be taken out of the way for those characters to really come into their own. Even if he were at the Wall I personally don't believe that would be getting him "out of the way" enough. If he were at the Wall we'd still be wondering why he isn't doing something to help his kids out, etc.? The vow not to interfere in the kingdoms? That's not satisfying because, of course, precedence had already been set that he was perfectly capable of doing the "dishonorable" thing for love, etc. (assuming R+L=J and, of course, confessing treason to save Sansa). No, he had to die. Ned's death was also another brilliant signal (Bran's "fall" is another) to everyone reading that, no, this isn't your run-of-the-mill fantasy series ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naturally Low Highborn Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Few people outside of the throne room and/or red keep knows what exactly happened and why. Robert made Ned his son's regent (believing--at least publically--that Joff was his son and rightful heir to the throne)Once dead, Ned, who had "power" took what he knew about Joff's non-baretheon heritage to the next level and claimed that Stannis was heir to the throne.That power was paper thin because he failed to take Renly's advice about yanking Joff, taking Cersei with an army. Hind sight says he should have taken steps and protective measures to ensure his power was upheld. So, in fact, Ned did die because he claimed Stannis as king and not Joff. They bargained with him; Joff was a tool; Ned lost his head. His standing for Stannis is the reason he was called a traitor and had to make the decision to accept a plea bargain, confess his "treason", proclaim Joff as the true king, and be sent to the wall. So, in the opinion of westeros, he died FOR stannis ('s claim to the throne) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horizon Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Why a tv thread on the book forum? This is forbidden by the forum rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FakeJaqenH'ghar Posted June 24, 2014 Author Share Posted June 24, 2014 I'm fairly new to the forum and didn't realize I was breaking a rule. Relax. My apologies. The main point of the thread was to discuss (in terms of the book), whether or not one believes that Ned died for Stannis. The reference to the HBO series was made because that was the source which made me think about the terms of Ned's death. Simply, I just wanted to illustrate where my train of thought originated from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JedoBear Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Ned's head would still be in its place if he didn't tell Cersei that he knows that Joffrey is a bastard of Jaime. Just sayin'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.