Addressing Stark bias: Part 3

[butterbumps!]

What is the Stark mythos?

I should have put that in scare quotes. It's whatever has been skirted around and never directly addressed in any of these 3 threads about "true Starks" "True Northmen" "Starkness" "Stark supremacy" or whatever else keeps being alluded to. I was trying to use shorthand.

[Minsc]

7) Renly was right to go to Storms End when Stannis was laying siege to it instead of heading straight fro Kings Landing.

How is the criticism of Renly a facet of Stark bias? Simply, if anything I find it to be mostly Stanstans attempting to write off Renly as being worthless to better justify their crush on Stannis.

[John Doe]

"true Starks" "True Northmen" "Starkness" "Stark supremacy"

This has been adressed too many times.

[SacredOrderOfGreenMen]

I should have put that in scare quotes. It's whatever has been skirted around and never directly addressed in any of these 3 threads about "true Starks" "True Northmen" "Starkness" "Stark supremacy" or whatever else keeps being alluded to. I was trying to use shorthand.

The Stark legacy or mythology is interesting; it involves Bran the Builder, magic, the spiritual and magical symbolism of the weirwood tree that has connections to real-life mythologies about trees and the Tree of Life, as well as pieces of the darker side of Celtic myth and so on, but I've never see anyone in my short on time on this forum touch on it.

Unless you go over and talk to some of the heresy people, or the re-read project, that kind of deep analysis just isn't here. But it is very interesting. As a tumblr user I handled bits and pieces of it. I'm thinking of doing one huge post on it.

[Modesty Lannister]

The Stark legacy or mythology is interesting; it involves Bran the Builder, magic, the spiritual and magical symbolism of the weirwood tree that has connections to real-life mythologies about trees and the Tree of Life, as well as pieces of the darker side of Celtic myth and so on, but I've never see anyone in my short on time on this forum touch on it.

Unless you go over and talk to some of the heresy people, or the re-read project, that kind of deep analysis just isn't here. But it is very interesting. As a tumblr user I handled bits and pieces of it. I'm thinking of doing one huge post on it.

There were some threads, like the one, which is still ongoing about the God's Eye and Order of Green Men. But, pls, do make a thread. It is far more interesting than discussing who Sansa will decapitate.

[butterbumps!]

This has been directly adressed many times.

In a way that actually got to the source of it, and with both sides doing all they could to totally not entrench the divisions further I'm sure :rolleyes:

The Stark legacy or mythology is interesting; it involves Bran the Builder, magic, the spiritual and magical symbolism of the weirwood tree that has connections to real-life mythologies about trees and the Tree of Life, as well as pieces of the darker side of Celtic myth and so on, but I've never see anyone in my short on time on this forum touch on it.

Unless you go over and talk to some of the heresy people, or the re-read project, that kind of deep analysis just isn't here. But it is very interesting. As a tumblr user I handled bits and pieces of it. I'm thinking of doing one huge post on it.

Oh, sorry, I guess more bluntly, I meant interrogating the opinions that posters on one side are saying Stark fans are wrong for believing with close reading and limited scope. I do love these topics you mention, and as it happens, spend a lot of time in both heresy and the rereads.

[John Doe]

then I will be happy to go through them one by one via PM.

If you can point out how they were more unobjective than most other posts here you're welcome to do this btw.

[Frey Pie]

Butters your wrecking poop up

As I said before just because you support Starks doesn't mean your biased towards the Starks. All of the houses have their own fans. Do Starks have more? Yes. Are there fans more biased then say the ironborn fans? No, there are just more of them. Is this thread more anti Stark then constructive? Definitely

And it's pretty rare you find someone who truly thinks Frey pies were cool or who want children killed for vengeance. I don't think it's as widespread as people think, despite the support for it in some small areas

[butterbumps!]

If you can point out how they were more unobjective then most other posts here you're welcome to do this btw.

Are you serious?

Since you've said your aim is to be objective and slay bias, it's really not in your interest to keep trying to play off what are self-evidently unobjective, divisive comments as something else.

And, for the record, I am not either in your target "mythic Stark fan cohort," nor is the obvious bait to distract from the issue lost on me. As in, you're not going to get a spirited rehashing of all these alleged bias topics you keep bringing up from me.

[TheLastStark]

1) The quote is meaningless. He wasn't crying about it. They can't hold the Westerlands. Tywins not that far away. Where as by taking Moat Cailin with Robb south, they have a much better of holding the North than the Westerlands.

2) The Dornish were forced to fight by Aerys because he was holding Elia and her children hostage. And even then they only sent the bare minimum to for her and her kids.

3) Nope. She hid in the Vale for her son's protection which is also a perfectly legitimate reason. Heck, lack of interest is a perfectly legitimate reason because it was a stupid war. LF didn't tell her to stay out of the war. That's a myth. Staying out of that idiot war was the smart thing to do.

4) He should have been clearer. He said hold Riverrun. That's what he did. You can't expect Edmure to abandon his people. If Robb only wanted him to hold Riverrun he should have let Edmure in on their plans seeing as he knows Edmure, and Edmure was essential for his plan to work. Although, I get the feeling that they didn't have a plan and just wanted to railroad him into marrying a Frey girl anyways.

5) Not liking a character is fine. If someone says they don't like Balon, Lysa, Theon, Walder, Lady Dustin, Stannis and Renly I don't care. To each your own. However:

1) Robb offered Balon nothing and disrespected him and Balon doesn't have to serve House Starks interests.

2) Lysa did the smart thing for her people and her son by staying put in the Vale and shouldn't have to win Robb's wars for him.

3) Theon is a Greyjoy and owes his captors nothing. His allegiance is to Balon and everything he did up to killing the Millers boys was legit.

4) Walder had every right to be angry, after Robb used them and broke his word to marry Walders daughters. It was disrespectful.

5) Lady Dustin has every right to be angry at Ned for not bringing back her husbands bones when he brought his sisters.

6) Stannis was right not to agree to give up over half his Kingdom to the Starks.

7) Renly was right to go to Storms End when Stannis was laying siege to it instead of heading straight fro Kings Landing.

These people don't have to act in the interests of House Stark. The Starks are not gods.

Your ignorance amuses me.

1)The quote shows that he is afraid of Tywin and attacking the west, which influences his decision. They can't and have never held the north. House Reed would of helped Robbs army get around Moat Calin and they would have taken it from behind just like the ironmen did the first time, but they most likely would have captured Vic. Then they would of moved on to WF and capture Theon. Then to Deepwood Motte and retake that, possibly capturing Asha. And even if they were to hold Deepwood, what do they get from it? Snow and wood, that's just what the ironborn need. Where as if they invade the west, they can get lots of gold and jewels. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm. Paying the "iron price" for snow and wood or gold and jewels? You tell me which you would rather get. I don't like Balon because he is a hypocrite and a pussy. a)claims to pay the "iron price" by raiding villages and sneak attacks on undefended wooden forts? b)is scared of Tywin. There is nothing in the north for them and they can't hold it. Where as in the west they can at least get rich. Attacking the west is more paying the "iron price" and actually getting something of value.

2)Elia was married to Rhaegar if you can remember. The Dornish have always been Targaryen supporters. So no, just no.

3)Everything she did after(and including) killing Jon Arryn was what LF told her to do. The Blackfish asked her for 1000 men to help stop the raidings before the war started, and she still said no. Why? Because LF told her to stay in the Vale? She wrote to Cat about the Lannisters because why? LF told her too. To say that she stayed in the Vale because of LF is a myth is funny, seeing as she does everything else he tells her to do.

4)I already agree on that, but holding RR is not the same as engaging the enemy in the open field.

Howevers:

1)Releasing his son and offering him a crown is disrespectful and offering nothing? Um he offered him freedom from the crown and his son. Plus whatever treasures he would of gotten from pillaging the Westerlands.

2)Lysa did nothing for her people. She did it for selfish reasons, and Robb was doing fine until the Frey and Karstark fuck ups. If he had the Vale he would of crushed Tywin, but he was already winning.

3)IIRC he swore his allegiance to the King of the North along with all the northern and river lords.

4)Yes he does, but murdering them for breaking a marriage vow seems a little extreme, and if you don't think so I would hate to cut you off in traffic.

5)Yes she does.

6)Never said he was wrong

7)No he wasn't. If SE didn't fall during RR with the power of the Reach besieging it, then Stannis's smaller force wasn't going to take it.

1. Lannisport would be much more difficult to hold than the parts of the North you mentioned. Of course, Lannisport and other parts of the west would be a much better prize than the North, but there's a much greater chance for the Ironborn to hold parts of the North. Balon isn't a pussy for doing the smart thing and attacking the places he might actually be able to keep.

2. Renly certainly could've tried harder to win Dorne, but Dorne's strength isn't of much significance compared to the might of the Reach and the Stormlands, so it wasn't a grievous error.

3. Hoster forced Lysa (against her will) to abort her first child and then marry Jon Arryn, who was old enough to be her grandfather and totally repulsive to her. I don't fault Lysa for not wanting to help him. Also, even if Lysa was staying out of the war for selfish reasons, it did benefit her people greatly.

1)Yes but they would never of held the north either, no matter how deluded he was. At least in the west you can come out rich, in the north all you get is ice for your sore asses after getting raped.

2)Too many swords is never a problem in wartime, and could of used Dorne to lift the siege on SE and still taken KL.

3)As long as we are on the same page that it was for selfish reasons and not for "her" people

[John Doe]

In a way that actually got to the source of it,

Some points you mentioned were proven wrong, others weren't. How would you do it?

[Lee-Sensei]

How is the criticism of Renly a facet of Stark bias? Simply, if anything I find it to be mostly Stanstans attempting to write off Renly as being worthless to better justify their crush on Stannis.

People were mentioning it. I suppose it's because if Renly had immediately taken KL, he'd have seriously crushed the Lannisters before things could go bad for the Starks.

[John Doe]

Are you serious?

Since you've said your aim is to be objective and slay bias, it's really not in your interest to keep trying to play off what are self-evidently unobjective, divisive comments as something else.

And, for the record, I am not either in your target "mythic Stark fan cohort," nor is the obvious bait to distract from the issue lost on me. As in, you're not going to get a spirited rehashing of all these alleged bias topics you keep bringing up from me.

Why do you make this offer then? You say my comments were in general more unobjective than most other comments, you want to discuss them, and then you don't want to, okay. You shouldn't have adressed me in this case and stayed on topic instead.

But let's stop the off topic here.

[butterbumps!]

Why do you make this offer then? You say my comments were in general more unobjective than most other comments, you want to discuss them, and then you don't want to, okay. You shouldn't have adressed me, then, and stayed on topic instead.

I offered to go through your comments (or any comments generally) via PM to look at their objectivity if you genuinely thought there wasn't bias in order to keep that discussion off of the thread. I am also saying that you are not going to get me to take the obvious bait and rehash the particular bias topics you keep bringing up in these threads within the thread itself, because it's unproductive and off topic in the sense that it skirts around the source of the issue.

ETA: that sounds fantastic.

[Lord Reaver]

Well, I don't even know if a full on reread is necessary. I think a topic like this, limited in scope to deconstructing the Stark mythos to the first 10 chapters only, might actually do the trick. Or some other type of strict parameter imposed that would force focus on how it was constructed by Martin or something.

No. Reading 10 chapters of a work of 5 books won't do it. As I already responded, it's straight forward to see that the early parts, if not all of AGOT is designed to make the reader root for the Starks. However, it should be equally plain to see that GRRM in his subsequent books raise questions about this assumption, to the point of undermining it entirely.

The exact same thing happens to Dany, and you end up with the exact same sort of Dany-fans, who can see no wrong in anything she does.

[John Doe]

the particular bias topics you keep bringing up in these threads within the thread itself,

I didn't do this here, read again.

[INCBlackbird]

the reason why there's such a huge stark bias is clear, as many people have pointed out they are the protagonists, 6 out of 8 POV's in AGOT are Stark POV's we see the story through their eyes, at least in the beginning. and first impressions are extremely important, we talked about it in one of my psychology classes at some point, even when you just meet someone, even when you haven't spoken a word to them, you will emmediatly form a view of that person in your head and changing that view is difficult because we tend to ignore things that disprove the view and notice things that proves it. in these books it goes so much further than that because we actually get to read it through their eyes! but the point is, that when we see someone and make such a view we can rantionalize by being aware we are doing this and telling ourselves "we could be wrong", in ASOIAF we get a lot of chapters of other characters from opposed points of views, especially in the later books and we should not be ignoring the information that disproves our previous view on the starks that was soully based on information we aquired through the starks (who are obviously biased about themselves) of course we should all take it with a grain of salt, also this new "disproving" information we get, because everything we get is filtered through someone's eyes. but it's important to not ignore any of the information we get, and with certain characters we can clearly see where said information comes from and through what event (or even simply personality or culturally constructed opinion) it was formed that way.

my point is, it's logical that lots of people have a stark bias, but that doesn't make it any less of a bias, and it's better if we are aware of our biases and not simply view them as fact. we can also allow ourselves to change our bias as the books progress and we get new information on a character. we don't have to desparately hold on to our first vision by ignoring things that "should" change it,

then there's also the fact that it doesn't have to be one vs the other, I for one am not in favor or a certain house (I'm more in favour of a lot of different characters, some belong to house stark, some to house lannister, some to house greyjoy...) you can easily love two characters who belong to different "teams" it's also not about who is better then the other, all characters have their faults and their qualities, some characters have more bad qualities then good qualities, some more good then bad, but it's not a competision.

and one more Thing, you don't have to justify liking a character by claiming they are perfect (like I have often seen done with the starks, with Ned in particular) perfect characters are generally unrealistic, luckily we don't really have those in asoiaf, I think they're all interesting in their own way, it's just personal preferance whom you find more interesting. but you can like a character and still admit to their flaws and you can dislike a character and still admit they have some good sides too, that doesn't discredit your like or dislike. in fact (I have asked this question before) if you love a character so much, why would you want to change, it tells me that if you change them, you don't love the real character but rather your own version of them.

[butterbumps!]

No. Reading 10 chapters of a work of 5 books won't do it. As I already responded, it's straight forward to see that the early parts, if not all of AGOT is designed to make the reader root for the Starks. However, it should be equally plain to see that GRRM in his subsequent books raise questions about this assumption, to the point of undermining it entirely.

The exact same thing happens to Dany, and you end up with the exact same sort of Dany-fans, who can see no wrong in anything she does.

I realize this didn't come across on my part in that post (so I'm sorry it wasn't clearer), but I meant to suggest that as the beginning of debate on the subject. Like, I think if it's a topic about bias construction generally, then starting with a limited sample of chapters would help rein it in, in a purely practical sense, just to give a focus. I think it's a subject that lends itself to incremental building with subsequent threads, but that was my suggestion for where a topic like this could be started, without having to deal with a full-blown reread, which can be unwieldy.

[Lee-Sensei]

Your ignorance amuses me.

1)The quote shows that he is afraid of Tywin and attacking the west, which influences his decision. They can't and have never held the north. House Reed would of helped Robbs army get around Moat Calin and they would have taken it from behind just like the ironmen did the first time, but they most likely would have captured Vic. Then they would of moved on to WF and capture Theon. Then to Deepwood Motte and retake that, possibly capturing Asha. And even if they were to hold Deepwood, what do they get from it? Snow and wood, that's just what the ironborn need. Where as if they invade the west, they can get lots of gold and jewels. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm. Paying the "iron price" for snow and wood or gold and jewels? You tell me which you would rather get. I don't like Balon because he is a hypocrite and a pussy. a)claims to pay the "iron price" by raiding villages and sneak attacks on undefended wooden forts? b)is scared of Tywin. There is nothing in the north for them and they can't hold it. Where as in the west they can at least get rich. Attacking the west is more paying the "iron price" and actually getting something of value.

2)Elia was married to Rhaegar if you can remember. The Dornish have always been Targaryen supporters. So no, just no.

3)Everything she did after(and including) killing Jon Arryn was what LF told her to do. The Blackfish asked her for 1000 men to help stop the raidings before the war started, and she still said no. Why? Because LF told her to stay in the Vale? She wrote to Cat about the Lannisters because why? LF told her too. To say that she stayed in the Vale because of LF is a myth is funny, seeing as she does everything else he tells her to do.

4)I already agree on that, but holding RR is not the same as engaging the enemy in the open field.

Howevers:

1)Releasing his son and offering him a crown is disrespectful and offering nothing? Um he offered him freedom from the crown and his son. Plus whatever treasures he would of gotten from pillaging the Westerlands.

2)Lysa did nothing for her people. She did it for selfish reasons, and Robb was doing fine until the Frey and Karstark fuck ups. If he had the Vale he would of crushed Tywin, but he was already winning.

3)IIRC he swore his allegiance to the King of the North along with all the northern and river lords.

4)Yes he does, but murdering them for breaking a marriage vow seems a little extreme, and if you don't think so I would hate to cut you off in traffic.

5)Yes she does.

6)Never said he was wrong

7)No he wasn't. If SE didn't fall during RR with the power of the Reach besieging it, then Stannis's smaller force wasn't going to take it.

1)Yes but they would never of held the north either, no matter how deluded he was. At least in the west you can come out rich, in the north all you get is ice for your sore asses after getting raped.

2)Too many swords is never a problem in wartime, and could of used Dorne to lift the siege on SE and still taken KL.

3)As long as we are on the same page that it was for selfish reasons and not for "her" people

I live to please.

1) It shows that he knows better than to attack Tywin. Recognizing that someone is strong doesn't mean that he was crying about it. Tywin recognized that Stannis was a big threat, but he wasn't crying about it.

2) Balon got what he wanted. Revenge. He crushed the Starks and destroyed any chance of a Stark victory. Good for him. It would also be a lot more difficult for them to take the North had Balon lived than you're making it out to be.

3) You're disagreeing with GRRM, kid.

4) Wrong. She killed Jon Arryn because he was going to send SR to Stannis. She didn't give Brynden men to fight because she didn't care about their war, hates Hoster Tully and wanted to protect her son. LF probably planted the ideas in her head, but for the most part it was her being an over protective mother or her hatred for her father that guided her actions. Not like in the show.

5) That's why as Edmure's commander it's his responsibility to give his subordinates clear and concise orders.

1) Theon's not a piece of furniture and Robb can't offer Balon a crown because he doesn't have that authority. That was disrespectful. In reality Robb was begging Balon and other Highlords to win his war and give him a crown. The gold they would have gotten from the Westerlands wouldn't be given by Robb. It would have been taken by the Iron Born. They are not subjects they are not slaves. They're Iron Born. They take what is theirs.

2) Lysa did it for her son and not her people, but they undeniably benefitted from staying out of that stupid succession war.

3) That was creative liberties taken by the show writers. In the books he doesn't swear fealty to Robb because the son and heir of King Balon swearing fealty to a Stark doesn't make any sense. He became friends with Robb and not Jon because Robb was his social equal. He wouldn't subject himself to being Robb's vassal and if he did the Iron Born would never accept him as their leader.

4) The Red Wedding was crossing the line, but they had a legitimate grudge and some people don't seem to accept that.

5) I never said you said he was wrong, but a lot of people do.

6) The only thing Mace Tyrell layed siege to was a banquet table. Removing any threat to his castle comes first. Look what the Greyjoys did to the Starks.

7) They wouldn't have been stomped as bad as you're making it out to be and what they got was revenge.

8) Dorne wasn't going to join him.

9) It wasn't for selfish reasons. She did it to protect her son which is a perfectly legitimate reason. It just happened to benefit everyone in the Vale.

[Minsc]

People were mentioning it. I suppose it's because if Renly had immediately taken KL, he'd have seriously crushed the Lannisters before things could go bad for the Starks.

I wasn't meaning to single you out as I knew others had mentioned it, only I went for the latest post mentioning Renly. But, my point still is that I rarely see Stark fans criticizing Renly in respect to how he affect them instead it is Stanstans attempting to diminish him to booster their favorite.