Jump to content

[Book Spoilers] EP503 Discussion


Ran
 Share

Recommended Posts

As for the nudity.... I am watching the show for the content, not for the pornography of it. I have no problem with porn. I just want to keep it as porn. Mathew Weiner (creater of Mad Men) has said that nudity is distracting to him when he is watching a show. I tend to agree. As others have pointed out with Oberyn, sometimes the nudity is needed to tell the story. And I am fine with that. I just don't see the purpose of it when it doesn't have something to do with the plot.

:agree:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for the nudity.... I am watching the show for the content, not for the pornography of it. I have no problem with porn. I just want to keep it as porn. Mathew Weiner (creater of Mad Men) has said that nudity is distracting to him when he is watching a show. I tend to agree. As others have pointed out with Oberyn, sometimes the nudity is needed to tell the story. And I am fine with that. I just don't see the purpose of it when it doesn't have something to do with the plot.

I agree with you. Game of Thrones, like many in pay-cable, has a lot of gratuitous nudity. I could live without it, and Mad Men is an excellent example of a show that is sexy without showing anything.

The criticism of the nudity on Game of Thrones had previously been that there wasn't gender/sex parity; that is, more gratuitous female nudity than male. It seems like they've taken pains to correct that somewhat, with Daario, Olyvar, and Loras. Still, if we're going to zoom in on the groomed crotch of a Seven cosplay whore, it seems like parity is still a long way off since male full frontal is much more rare, fleeting, and as someone complained above, flaccid.

ETA: But I'm torn. Should the reaction to casual and pointless objectification of women really be a call for more objectification of men?

Edited by Lazarová
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tywin & Tyrion are exactly alike. The only difference is that Tyrion was a drawf and Tywin kept his whores private.

As for the nudity.... I am watching the show for the content, not for the pornography of it. I have no problem with porn. I just want to keep it as porn. Mathew Weiner (creater of Mad Men) has said that nudity is distracting to him when he is watching a show. I tend to agree. As others have pointed out with Oberyn, sometimes the nudity is needed to tell the story. And I am fine with that. I just don't see the purpose of it when it doesn't have something to do with the plot.

:agree:

Well, except that I do see the purpose of it when it doesn't have something to do with the plot. The pervy purpose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In regards to Sansa, I think what LF is doing makes sense, though it is a gamble. Here's what he knows..

1) He knows there is no love for the Boltons in the north, making their hold of Winterfell tenuous as bests.

2) He knows the Lannisters, Bolton's biggest ally, is in rapid decline, leaving the Tyrells, his ally, top dog in King's Landing.

3) He believes the two Stark boys are dead.

4) He knows Stannis is at the wall with Sansa's half brother and will be marching south.

So given this knowledge, there are two scenarios I think LF would anticipate that could play out in Winterfell, and they both revolve around Stannis.

1) Stannis takes Winterfell. Because Stannis knows that only a Stark can hold WF, he would leave Sansa as Lord and dispose of Ramsey, giving him the North. Sansa would then lie her teeth off as she did in the Vale, claiming Littlefinger and the Vale is with her, citing their inactivity in their wars of the south, and have his allegiance.

2) The Boltons beat Stannis. Less likely, but if the Boltons were to win the battle, they'd be severely weakened. The Vale could, afterwards, invade the North at full strength in surprise and dispose of the Boltons. We all know the lords of the Vale like the Starks after Ned's stewardship so they'd have no problem defending Sansa, and the Tyrells in Kings Landing wouldn't care, because they also highly regard Sansa and would prefer a Lannister ally tossed out, anyway.

To help his cause, I believe it will be Littlefinger, not Jon, who sends in the spear wives to protect Sansa, wreak havoc on Wintefell. Ramsey will capture them, blame Jon, and send a letter threatening him furthering Jon's story arc. Does Littlefinger know what a vicious little twat Ramsey is? Probably not. It's a gamble. But no guts, no glory.

I agree with a lot of this, except I think it's fairer to say that LF isn't really counting much on Stannis rather than the other way around. Nobody at the wall is sending ravens off to all of Westeros saying "NP guys, Stannis got our backs, props to him". I'm not sure anyone yet knows Stannis went to the wall outside of the North.

However you make a VERY good point in the relative Botlon weakness, and that is key. LF sees an opportunity because he knows how bad the Boltons need Sansa. Yes, the Boltons participated in the RW -- they're certainly not trustworthy -- but LF has, in his mind, done business with such shady people before. Not unjustly, LF believes he can gain from marrying Sansa off and have pull in the Vale and the North simultaniously. He is using the remenants of the alliance of Robert's Rebellion to his advantage. And with almost any other noble family, this would work out for him.

However the Boltons are psychopaths. We know that, LF doesn't. That's why it won't ultimately work out, but there's no way he's able to know that. The RW isn't enough of an indication since the Freys took most of the heat for that.

There's just one problem with that. None of your scenarios requires LF to leave the Vale and marry Sansa to the Boltons. Just wait it out and then make your move. It's just bad writing. The writers wanted a situation and they made it, even if it doesn't make sense.

Au contraire, if LF is not putting much stock in Stannis getting anywhere -- and I think that's the prevailing wisdom in Westeros just as it was in the Iron Bank scene last season -- then LF definately SHOULD get Sansa married off to the Boltons soon. Because if he doesn't, Roose is going to get Ramsey married off to the most powerful banner house possible, whether it's the Umbers, Manderlys, Karstarks or whoever else. If he misses that boat, then they don't have a foothold in the North.

This way, he assures the Boltons of support from the Vale -- in actual fact LF would have trouble getting an army out to support the Boltons in the North, but the Boltons don't know that. And in return he gets nominal support of the North for any plans he might have, within reason. He might not get their support if he wants to invade somewhere... heck, he couldn't get much Vale support if he wanted to invade somewhere... but he can get a multitude of access to non-essential resources and information in the North that he can use to better advantage later. To the effect that down the line, maybe he COULD influence the North into mustering an army for him, given the right approach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with you. Game of Thrones, like many in pay-cable, has a lot of gratuitous nudity. I could live without it, and Mad Men is an excellent example of a show that is sexy without showing anything.

The criticism of the nudity on Game of Thrones had previously been that there wasn't gender/sex parity; that is, more gratuitous female nudity than male. It seems like they've taken pains to correct that somewhat, with Daario, Olyvar, and Loras. Still, if we're going to zoom in on the groomed crotch of a Seven cosplay whore, it seems like parity is still a long way off since male full frontal is much more rare, fleeting, and as someone complained above, flaccid.

ETA: But I'm torn. Should the reaction to casual and pointless objectification of women really be a call for more objectification of men?

I agree with all of your post except the bit about them taking pains to correct anything. To me it seems like there's always been dude-ass on the show, maybe even as much as lady-ass, so seeing those lads gluting it up doesn't feel like the showmakers are doing anything different. In fact when in the first three episodes alone we've had tits galore, plus ladyfrontal, in the Meereen brothel alleys, and then the waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay over-the-top KL whorehouse scene, the imbalance feels "worse" than ever.

As for the ETA: I'm torn too. Obviously it'd be a classier show worth taking more seriously if it felt less pervy, but it's also a lot of fun to take it less seriously as a pervy, somewhat guilty, pleasure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you don't understand why its better to have something that is valuable with you than to give it away there really is no way anybody can explain that to you. Sansa is not his daughter and she is not his sister and practically she is nothing to him and that means that as soon as she isn't under his wing any more he doesn't have any control over her.

She wasn't under his wing anymore when the Vale lords came a'callin to look into Lysa's death. Yet somehow he still controlled her enough to get by.

LF did not 'give Sansa away'. He's proposing a political alliance and that's what he's getting. Like a fistfull of cash, having Sansa in your back pocket means nothing unless you are willing to spend her.

She is extremely valuable to him but only if she is under his control and right now, after he delivered her to Roose, he doesn't have any control over her any more. The only control he can have is what you apologists make up but in reality there is no control over Sansa by Littlefinger any more.

Then Sansa is useless to him anyway. What good is it going to do him if she's just hanging around? The value is in the Stark name. Having Sansa remain in the Eyrie year after year wastes the potential of that name in the North.

Littlefinger left Robin and now he left Sansa so that means he gave up his best claim on the vale and his best claim on the north in just few episodes. And about Boltons what really do they owe Littlefinger any more? They owe nothing to him any more once they have Sansa. This is rather shocking to see so many of you defending all the stupid things this show keep doing every episode but this thing with Sansa and Ramsay takes the cake clearly. If you think that isn't stupid than most definitely nothing will ever be stupid for you. And if you aren't able to recognize any stupidity in the show then please tell me how can you not be apologist?

Umm... support from the Vale? The Boltons know what's going on in the Vale even less than LF knows what's going on in the North. They probably figure that LF might be able to get troops to help them out if they run into trouble with the bannermen, as well as using Sansa to help sway said bannermen.

Are you so sure this is not a situation of show apologists but that maybe you're mistaken and following your first reaction rather than thinking the situation through? It's true the show has made missteps in the past, but in this case when you think it out, it makes a lot more sense than at first glance.

Edited by Nilan8888
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you don't understand why its better to have something that is valuable with you than to give it away there really is no way anybody can explain that to you. Sansa is not his daughter and she is not his sister and practically she is nothing to him and that means that as soon as she isn't under his wing any more he doesn't have any control over her. She is extremely valuable to him but only if she is under his control and right now, after he delivered her to Roose, he doesn't have any control over her any more. The only control he can have is what you apologists make up but in reality there is no control over Sansa by Littlefinger any more. Littlefinger left Robin and now he left Sansa so that means he gave up his best claim on the vale and his best claim on the north in just few episodes. And about Boltons what really do they owe Littlefinger any more? They owe nothing to him any more once they have Sansa. This is rather shocking to see so many of you defending all the stupid things this show keep doing every episode but this thing with Sansa and Ramsay takes the cake clearly. If you think that isn't stupid than most definitely nothing will ever be stupid for you. And if you aren't able to recognize any stupidity in the show then please tell me how can you not be apologist?

Sansa is Littlefinger's niece by law, so he will always have a hold over her. Saying I don't understand is weak. I've given you multiple opportunities to explain your position and the only thing you keep coming back to is that Littlefinger is stupid for giving Sansa away without giving a valid explanation. What does keeping Sansa close give Littlefinger? Pieces are meant to be played, and he is playing Sansa in an effort to get the North. In the books, Litttlefinger is planning on giving Sansa away to a husband, relinquishing his control of her. Why is it stupid in the show but not in the books? Also, say Littlefinger leaves Sansa in the Bolton's hands and goes to KL. What can Roose Bolton possibly do that would cause Littlefinger's scheme to blow up in his face?

I'm not an apologist because I haven't come to a definite opinion on Sansa's storyline. It could be just as bad as you claim, but I'm going to give D&D the benefit of the doubt and wait for it to play out before coming to a conclusion on the matter. I know you'll probably say that D&D's past history speaks for itself, but I actually like the show. There have been a few misses, but it doesn't change the fact that it's given me some of the best scenes I've ever seen on television.

Btw, using terms such as "book purist" and "show apologist" indicates that the poster has nothing left to contribute to the argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She wasn't under his wing anymore when the Vale lords came a'callin to look into Lysa's death. Yet somehow he still controlled her enough to get by.

LF did not 'give Sansa away'. He's proposing a political alliance and that's what he's getting. Like a fistfull of cash, having Sansa in your back pocket means nothing unless you are willing to spend her.

Then Sansa is useless to him anyway. What good is it going to do him if she's just hanging around? The value is in the Stark name. Having Sansa remain in the Eyrie year after year wastes the potential of that name in the North.

Umm... support from the Vale? The Boltons know what's going on in the Vale even less than LF knows what's going on in the North. They probably figure that LF might be able to get troops to help them out if they run into trouble with the bannermen, as well as using Sansa to help sway said bannermen.

Are you so sure this is not a situation of show apologists but that maybe you're mistaken and following your first reaction rather than thinking the situation through? It's true the show has made missteps in the past, but in this case when you think it out, it makes a lot more sense than at first glance.

It doesn't make any sense just like the last year story in the vale didn't make any sense. Last year there was no reason that she would lie to protect him and explanation she gave was as weak as anything and now just because of that nonsense he has hold of her. Which means that D&D just continue on their nonsense with even bigger nonsense. But the most ridiculous thing is when you say that Sansa is useless to him in the vale. She is oldest living Stark which means she will never be useless because she will always have her family name. She is useless to Littlefinger only if she is dead or married to someone he can't control. And Littlefinger does exactly that because he is giving her away to someone he can't controls (Boltons). And they are also psychopaths so she also can end up dead very soon and it is really weak excuse that he doesn't know. Giving Sansa away to family you don't know anything about is bad. Giving Sansa away to family of psychopaths is worse. Giving Sansa away to family you don't know anything about and they are also psychopaths, well that must be the worst. If you think my opinion about it will improve if I think it out then you haven't been paying attention to anything I said already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sansa is Littlefinger's niece by law, so he will always have a hold over her. Saying I don't understand is weak. I've given you multiple opportunities to explain your position and the only thing you keep coming back to is that Littlefinger is stupid for giving Sansa away without giving a valid explanation. What does keeping Sansa close give Littlefinger? Pieces are meant to be played, and he is playing Sansa in an effort to get the North. In the books, Litttlefinger is planning on giving Sansa away to a husband, relinquishing his control of her. Why is it stupid in the show but not in the books? Also, say Littlefinger leaves Sansa in the Bolton's hands and goes to KL. What can Roose Bolton possibly do that would cause Littlefinger's scheme to blow up in his face?

I'm not an apologist because I haven't come to a definite opinion on Sansa's storyline. It could be just as bad as you claim, but I'm going to give D&D the benefit of the doubt and wait for it to play out before coming to a conclusion on the matter. I know you'll probably say that D&D's past history speaks for itself, but I actually like the show. There have been a few misses, but it doesn't change the fact that it's given me some of the best scenes I've ever seen on television.

Btw, using terms such as "book purist" and "show apologist" indicates that the poster has nothing left to contribute to the argument.

What else can I say when you don't understand the concept of possession. You are trying to persuade me that Littlefinger had capital which is Sansa and he made smart investment by giving that capital for Boltons. But in fact he invested his bigest capital in the weakest company in the market and he can win it back only in some unrealistic outcome. How stupid one have to be to leave his most valuable possession in war zone that is about to happen? And just like I said in previous post: marrying Sansa to family you don't know anything about is bad, marrying Sansa to family of psychopaths is worse, and marrying Sansa to family of psychopaths and you don't know anything about them is absolute worst. And just think about this: Boltons have Winterfell for now but Sansa's claim to Winterfell is much much stronger then theirs but Littlefinger is giving her away to them? Sansa is safer anywhere then in Bolton hands and you are telling me that it makes sense? Really the show had many stupid decisions in the past but this is something absolutely embarrassing and I really don't see how can anybody say it isn't. Only apologist can say it isn't and if you don't like being called apologist then maybe you should stop defending this ridiculous decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What else can I say when you don't understand the concept of possession. You are trying to persuade me that Littlefinger had capital which is Sansa and he made smart investment by giving that capital for Boltons. But in fact he invested his bigest capital in the weakest company in the market and he can win it back only in some unrealistic outcome. How stupid one have to be to leave his most valuable possession in war zone that is about to happen? And just like I said in previous post: marrying Sansa to family you don't know anything about is bad, marrying Sansa to family of psychopaths is worse, and marrying Sansa to family of psychopaths and you don't know anything about them is absolute worst. And just think about this: Boltons have Winterfell for now but Sansa's claim to Winterfell is much much stronger then theirs but Littlefinger is giving her away to them? Sansa is safer anywhere then in Bolton hands and you are telling me that it makes sense? Really the show had many stupid decisions in the past but this is something absolutely embarrassing and I really don't see how can anybody say it isn't. Only apologist can say it isn't and if you don't like being called apologist then maybe you should stop defending this ridiculous decision.

I'm an optimist, not a show apologist. I'm not defending the scene, I'm entertaining the possibility that the showrunners are making good decisions with Sansa and Littlefinger's storyline and will do both characters the justice they deserve. If I'm wrong, I will admit it, but until then, we'll have to wait and see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't make any sense just like the last year story in the vale didn't make any sense. Last year there was no reason that she would lie to protect him and explanation she gave was as weak as anything and now just because of that nonsense he has hold of her.

Unfortunately it makes all too much sense as to why Sansa would protect him.

Most people tend to say that Sansa made the wiser move with LF in not sellnig him out to the Vale lords -- which I absolutely disagree with, I think it was a horrible mistake and anyone who knows anything about the Royces would know that... but in the position of Sansa who's been abused, tormented, and forced to endure the outright abuse of Jeoffrey, the emotional abuse of Cersei, the more subtle abuse of LF himself and even the back and forth quasi-emotional abuse and quasi-support of the Hound, the desire to hold onto what she thinks she knows makes intellectual sense to me. I'm not sure I can relate to it, but I know people who would make decisions like that. There but for the grace of God go I, but protecting someone potentially like LF from people that would see things done right and treat them better makes sense to them.

Which means that D&D just continue on their nonsense with even bigger nonsense. But the most ridiculous thing is when you say that Sansa is useless to him in the vale. She is oldest living Stark which means she will never be useless because she will always have her family name. She is useless to Littlefinger only if she is dead or married to someone he can't control.

Not unless he marries her off. At which point she's more or less as out of his control as she is in the North. Who in the Vale can LF control except for Robin? And even in the books, only Robin is looking for Sansa to marry Robin.

She is useless to Littlefinger only if she is dead or married to someone he can't control. And Littlefinger does exactly that because he is giving her away to someone he can't controls (Boltons). And they are also psychopaths so she also can end up dead very soon and it is really weak excuse that he doesn't know. Giving Sansa away to family you don't know anything about is bad. Giving Sansa away to family of psychopaths is worse. Giving Sansa away to family you don't know anything about and they are also psychopaths, well that must be the worst. If you think my opinion about it will improve if I think it out then you haven't been paying attention to anything I said already.

LF can't know everyone. He knows about the Boltons, he just doesn't know as much as he needs to: but there's no way of knowing that. Were the Boltons ANYONE else... except House Clegane or MAYBE the Greyjoys... this would be fine. Even if the Boltons had the disposition of House Lannister. Even if they had the disposition of House Frey.

We only know they're psychopaths because we're outside of the story, reading it. But within the story, there's not a lot of psychopath noble familys: Tullys, Umbers, Karstarks, Tyrells, Martells, Lannisters (yes, they're not psychopaths like the Boltons), Freys, Royces, Dondarrions, Tarths, Baratheons...any given family is going to look more like these examples than the Boltons, RW or not. After all, the RW was done in wartime with the Boltons getting out of the losing side that already had one major house in rebellion over a completely separate incident (Karstarks), most likely to the outside proposed by either Tywin Lanniser or Lord Frey. Given that LF has done business with murderous traitors in the past (Janos Slynt), there's little to indicate the Boltons are a family of Dexter Morgans. That's just not a likely assumption or precaution to make if you're living in the world of Westeros and don't know what's up at the Dreadfort. It might be the RIGHT precaustion to take as it turns out, but it's not a likely one. People who would do that are well and truly paranoid and unable to get ahead BECAUSE they're too paranoid.

Whatever way you slice it LF HAS to give Sansa up to someone he can't completely control because he doesn't have a real family name. Even in the Vale, he can't truly control the noble families. That he is even less able to control the Boltons is true... but then the potential rewards of helping out the Boltons versus the Royces are that much greater.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I absolutely loved was the fact that Sweetrobin got dropped off with the ultimate badass Yohn Royce. So in my head cannon now, Stannis and Jon come south only to be beaten by the Boltons... then when all seems lost and on the eve of Ramsay's wedding to Sansa, Sweetrobin single handedly storms the castle... Kicking ass, taking names, and sucking on some titties... (cuz you know he can't completely change.)

OMG this so needs to happen in the comedic spin-off version of the show!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said this elsewhere but it seems pretty pertinent: outcomes regarding Sansa.



1) Sansa stays alive. Stannis takes Winterfell. With Sansa there, he gets Stannis off his back by explaining how he rescued her from KL.


2) Sansa stays alive. Boltons keep Winterfell. He rallies other northern lords to take them out after some prompting.


3) Sansa dies. Stannis takes Winterfell. He explains to Stannis how he tried to get a Stark in Winterfell.


4) Sansa dies. Boltons keep Winterfell. He rallies other northern lords to take them out with very little prompting.



I don't think Littlefinger's planning for 5 & 6: Sansa escapes Winterfell. If Stannis wins, he goes after LF. If the Boltons win, they go after LF.



I doubt he cares one way or the other about avenging the Red Wedding, and I don't think he wants Sansa dead, but he's willing to accept her as collateral damage. Because he's a sociopath. She isn't the be-all-end-all piece in his chess box. She's just another pawn. She is a valuable pawn, but if she survives by getting smarter she becomes more valuable. If not, she isn't an awful loss for him. For him.



For us, it's another matter. We are invested in Sansa so seeing her being placed into harm's way is dumb. But I think that's what the writers are intending for us to feel.



I think Littlefinger's choices in the show make enough sense in that light. (For me. I understand if it's too much for others.)


Edited by MVC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What else can I say when you don't understand the concept of possession. You are trying to persuade me that Littlefinger had capital which is Sansa and he made smart investment by giving that capital for Boltons. But in fact he invested his bigest capital in the weakest company in the market and he can win it back only in some unrealistic outcome. How stupid one have to be to leave his most valuable possession in war zone that is about to happen? And just like I said in previous post: marrying Sansa to family you don't know anything about is bad, marrying Sansa to family of psychopaths is worse, and marrying Sansa to family of psychopaths and you don't know anything about them is absolute worst. And just think about this: Boltons have Winterfell for now but Sansa's claim to Winterfell is much much stronger then theirs but Littlefinger is giving her away to them? Sansa is safer anywhere then in Bolton hands and you are telling me that it makes sense? Really the show had many stupid decisions in the past but this is something absolutely embarrassing and I really don't see how can anybody say it isn't. Only apologist can say it isn't and if you don't like being called apologist then maybe you should stop defending this ridiculous decision.

Whaaaaa? Are we watching/reading the same story?

the Boltons are FAR from the 'weakest company'. In fact, in the books they seem to be stronger than Stannis. In the show they may be as well. But there is nobody particularly opposing the Boltons. But they have a long family name, troops of their own (ones that were not decimated at the RW), and most importantly, time to consolidate their position.

Sansa would help do that. LF is potentially buying low and selling high. He stands to reap great rewards if the Boltons consolidate that position. At least, if they weren't psychopaths... but that's off the table because LF is unaware of that. IF he was, I highly doubt he'd ever have considered doing this.

Yes, the Boltons are weak: but so is almost everyone else. And they have the potential for strength.

Marrying Sansa off to a family LF 'doesn't know' is frankly just what he has to put up with. She's from the North, where her name carries the most weight, and he's not from the North, which is a totally different culture. What he does know is that the top family in the North was the Starks, and he was able to manipulate Catelyn and Ned just fine. Nobody can know everything about everyone. Considering his plans would probably work if the Boltons didn't happen to be psychopaths is saying something: he'd stand to make a much more substantial gain to ally with the Boltons than Harry the Heir.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately it makes all too much sense as to why Sansa would protect him.

Most people tend to say that Sansa made the wiser move with LF in not sellnig him out to the Vale lords -- which I absolutely disagree with, I think it was a horrible mistake and anyone who knows anything about the Royces would know that... but in the position of Sansa who's been abused, tormented, and forced to endure the outright abuse of Jeoffrey, the emotional abuse of Cersei, the more subtle abuse of LF himself and even the back and forth quasi-emotional abuse and quasi-support of the Hound, the desire to hold onto what she thinks she knows makes intellectual sense to me. I'm not sure I can relate to it, but I know people who would make decisions like that. There but for the grace of God go I, but protecting someone potentially like LF from people that would see things done right and treat them better makes sense to them.

Not unless he marries her off. At which point she's more or less as out of his control as she is in the North. Who in the Vale can LF control except for Robin? And even in the books, only Robin is looking for Sansa to marry Robin.

LF can't know everyone. He knows about the Boltons, he just doesn't know as much as he needs to: but there's no way of knowing that. Were the Boltons ANYONE else... except House Clegane or MAYBE the Greyjoys... this would be fine. Even if the Boltons had the disposition of House Lannister. Even if they had the disposition of House Frey.

We only know they're psychopaths because we're outside of the story, reading it. But within the story, there's not a lot of psychopath noble familys: Tullys, Umbers, Karstarks, Tyrells, Martells, Lannisters (yes, they're not psychopaths like the Boltons), Freys, Royces, Dondarrions, Tarths, Baratheons...any given family is going to look more like these examples than the Boltons, RW or not. After all, the RW was done in wartime with the Boltons getting out of the losing side that already had one major house in rebellion over a completely separate incident (Karstarks), most likely to the outside proposed by either Tywin Lanniser or Lord Frey. Given that LF has done business with murderous traitors in the past (Janos Slynt), there's little to indicate the Boltons are a family of Dexter Morgans. That's just not a likely assumption or precaution to make if you're living in the world of Westeros and don't know what's up at the Dreadfort. It might be the RIGHT precaustion to take as it turns out, but it's not a likely one. People who would do that are well and truly paranoid and unable to get ahead BECAUSE they're too paranoid.

Whatever way you slice it LF HAS to give Sansa up to someone he can't completely control because he doesn't have a real family name. Even in the Vale, he can't truly control the noble families. That he is even less able to control the Boltons is true... but then the potential rewards of helping out the Boltons versus the Royces are that much greater.

Of course that Littlefinger has to chip Sansa at some point that is why he took her from Kings Landing after all. And that is not easy because he has to be careful not to loose control over her. Or maybe he can give her away for some big reward in return. But in fact what the show did is the worst of both: he doesn't control her any more and he received nothing in return. You are right that very few families are psychopaths but then Littlefinger is even more stupid for not knowing about Boltons. And who are we kidding: everybody in the north knows that Boltons are psychopaths but you excuse Littlefinger for not knowing. That is absurdly bad writing. If Martin pulled something like that in the books he would loose half of his readers at once. And not really reward of Boltons versus Royces are really not greater at all. Both families are uncontrollable by Littlefinger but at least Royces are honest and he knows that while Boltons are unpredictable psychopaths and he knows that or is stupid for not knowing that. In the end Littlefinger could chip Sansa if he is playing carefully and if he thinks about his moves and prepares well for his moves. But in the show he did exactly opposite and that is why it is so nonsensical: he wasn't careful and he didn't prepare and he didn't think it through. Because the show is stupid, Sansa and Littlefinger will probably come out of all unharmed because of some ridiculous outcome. but it doesn't mean this decision was unbelievably ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the Boltons are FAR from the 'weakest company'.

Exactly. There's a reason they included Roose's line "We've become a great house by..."

Sure, he points out that they can't hold the North (a big fucking place) if all the other houses rise up against them, but that hardly makes them a negligible power. The fact that the other northern houses would have to team up to threaten them says something in and of itself.

Edited by Udvarnoky
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course that Littlefinger has to chip Sansa at some point that is why he took her from Kings Landing after all. And that is not easy because he has to be careful not to loose control over her. Or maybe he can give her away for some big reward in return. But in fact what the show did is the worst of both: he doesn't control her any more and he received nothing in return.

Firstly we don't know what he might have gained in immediate terms: we don't know how much gold or goods were exchanged. But he has in effect gained an alliance with the wardens of the North. How can that possibly be 'receiving nothing'? Ten years down the line he can use that alliance to do all sorts of things. 'Hey, can I get you to lend me 20 men?' 'Yeah, sure'. 'Hey, can I get you to lend me a ship or two?' 'Yeah, sure'. True, it would be more complex than that, but I'm just trying to give you the scope of favors and resources he now has potential access to. Whereas previously he did not.

Since the Boltons are now Wardens of the North and not just another banner house, those resources are now that much greater. Plus it's drawing from a completely different part of the seven kingdoms.

You are right that very few families are psychopaths but then Littlefinger is even more stupid for not knowing about Boltons. And who are we kidding: everybody in the north knows that Boltons are psychopaths but you excuse Littlefinger for not knowing.

No: stop right there. That is 100% false. You are in direct contridiction to both the books and the show. Not only does not everyone know the Boltons are psychopaths, most people in the North itself DON'T. It's the entire premise hinged on Roose's comment of "a quiet land, a quiet people" in ADWD. Roose is VERY careful word does not get out about his pasttimes, and Ramsey's. Yes, it's well known that the Boltons flayed and skinned their enemies and USED to probably be psychopathic... but that was at least 400 years ago, some time before Aegon's Conquest. In other words, transposed into our own world, a time before there was even a United States of America. Nobosy's going to use that as a basis since the Boltons were loyal until that time right up to the RW. Robert's Rebellion uncluded, BTW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whaaaaa? Are we watching/reading the same story?

the Boltons are FAR from the 'weakest company'. In fact, in the books they seem to be stronger than Stannis. In the show they may be as well. But there is nobody particularly opposing the Boltons. But they have a long family name, troops of their own (ones that were not decimated at the RW), and most importantly, time to consolidate their position.

Sansa would help do that. LF is potentially buying low and selling high. He stands to reap great rewards if the Boltons consolidate that position. At least, if they weren't psychopaths... but that's off the table because LF is unaware of that. IF he was, I highly doubt he'd ever have considered doing this.

Yes, the Boltons are weak: but so is almost everyone else. And they have the potential for strength.

Marrying Sansa off to a family LF 'doesn't know' is frankly just what he has to put up with. She's from the North, where her name carries the most weight, and he's not from the North, which is a totally different culture. What he does know is that the top family in the North was the Starks, and he was able to manipulate Catelyn and Ned just fine. Nobody can know everything about everyone. Considering his plans would probably work if the Boltons didn't happen to be psychopaths is saying something: he'd stand to make a much more substantial gain to ally with the Boltons than Harry the Heir.

We probably don't read the same story because yours look like some Disneyland. in the books it is impossible for me to think how did you figure out that Boltons are stronger than Stannis. They are in Winterfell and they are being murdered from people inside. It doesn't get weaker than that. Almost all of the north hates them and wants to see them dead. It is telling that they can't wait for Stannis any more and they must send their troops out of the castle. But about the show, just think about what you are saying, that Littlefinger would never agree to deal if he knew Boltons are psychopaths. But that's it, that is the essence of it. The main thing about Boltons is that they are psychopaths. They don't have gold mines like Lannisters or long military tradition like Baratheons they are known only for their cruelty. and that was before RW. After RW it only got worse for them. They are ruling the north because they are psychopaths that murdered their king as a guest. So if you live in Westeros and don't know about Boltons are psychopaths but want to make deals with them then you are really weak player and really stupid. And saying Boltons are better bet than Harry is really absurd. We definitely didn't read the same books because only idiot would marry Sansa Stark into family that he knows nothing about other than that Roose Boltons was one of the key players in Red Wedding where Sansa's brother and mother were slain in most disgusting way in history. It would be like if Edmure had a younger sister and some schemer from the north kidnaps her from hostage and marries her to Freys. What excuse would he have for that stupidity tell me? You could probably think of something because you look like finding excuse for anything the show does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...